Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.23 seconds)Section 11 in The Trade And Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 [Entire Act]
K. R. Chinna Krishna Chettiar vs Sri Ambal & Co., Madras & Anr on 14 April, 1969
(1) That the decision of the Supreme Court referred to above could not be pleaded as a bar by the plaintiffs in the present suit.
Raj Lakshmi Dasi And Others vs Banamali Sen And Othersbholanath Sen ... on 27 October, 1952
The above view receives support from the decision of the Supreme Court in Raj Lakshmi Dasi v. Banamali Sen, . It is no doubt true that the earlier decision in this case Is not one rendered in a suit and the same cannot be brought strictly within the four corners of Section 11, Civil P. C. Section 11. Civil P. C. as explained by tile Supreme Court in the above decision is not exhaustive but only deals with one aspect of the general rule of res judicata. If the case can be brought within the scope of the general rule of res judicata, the decision in the earlier proceeding can still be used as a bar in a subsequent proceeding notwithstanding the fact that the earlier decision does not satisfy all the requirements of Section 11, Civil P. C. The facts of the case before the Supreme Court were these;
Section 106 in The Trade And Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 [Entire Act]
The Land Acquisition Act, 1894
1