Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 25 (0.36 seconds)Section 17 in The Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002 [Entire Act]
The Court-fees Act, 1870
Section 37 in The Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002 [Entire Act]
The General Clauses Act, 1897
The Recovery Of Debts Due To Banks And Financial Institutions Act, 1993
Section 66 in Karnataka Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958 [Entire Act]
Amit Jain vs Mahavir International Pvt Ltd & Ors. on 8 May, 2023
In Amit Jain v. Mahavir International Pvt. Ltd.,
FAO(COMM) 27/2023; 2023:DHC:3090-DB, where the
Commercial Court below had framed a clarificatory question
as to whether the dispute between the parties could be termed
as a commercial dispute within the definitional Section 2(c) of
the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and the appellant-plaintiff
thereafter, placing reliance upon decisions dealing with the
return of plaint under Order 7 and Rule 10 of the Civil
Procedure Code, 1908 had made an application under
Section 151 of the Code seeking conditional withdrawal of the
suit with liberty to file fresh suit before an appropriate forum,
on the grounds that the Commercial Court lacked jurisdiction
over the subject-matter of the lis, the Court below allowed the
same by treating it as an application made under Order 23
and Rule 3(1) of Civil Procedure Code, 1908, but refused the
return of court fees, the plaintiff had preferred an appeal
challenging such refusal.
R Prakash vs D M Ravikumar on 3 February, 2010
In Sri R. Prakash v. Sri D.M. Ravikumar and Anr,
ILR 2010 KAR 2198, where a suit for recovery of money was
withdrawn as settled out of Court even before the filing of the
written statement by the defendant, a coordinate bench of this
Court placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Salem Advocate Bar Assn II,
(2005) 6 SCC 344 and opined that merely because the State
had not amended the KSF & SV Act, it was not a good ground
to refuse a full refund of the court fee so deposited.