Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.30 seconds)The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Bombay vs T.P. Kumaran on 16 August, 1996
The left out portion of a cause of action cannot be
pursued in a subsequent writ proceedings. All claims
which a petitioner might and ought to have taken,
should be taken in one proceedings and only in one
proceedings. {See the decision of the Supreme Court
in Commissioner of Income-tax vs. T.P. Kumaran,
1996(1) SCC 561}.
Babubhai Muljibhai Patel vs Nandlal Khodidas Barot & Ors on 17 September, 1974
Babubhai Muljibhai Patel vs. Nandlal Khodidas Barot,
AIR 1974 SC 2105 and Sarguja Transport Service vs.
STAT, AIR 1987 SC 88)
Kundlu Devi & Another vs State Of H.P. & Others on 1 September, 2016
19. The question posed before this Court otherwise
stands directly answered by this Court in Kundlu Devi
and another vs. State of H.P. and others, Latest HLJ
2011 (HP) 579 wherein it was held as under:
Sidramappa vs Rajashetty And Ors on 9 December, 1969
of the claim or omits any of the remedies in respect
of the cause, he shall not be permitted to pursue the
omitted claim or the omitted remedy. The
requirement of the Rule is that every suit should
include the whole of the claim which the plaintiff is
entitled to make in respect of a cause of action.
Cause of action is a cause which gives occasion for
and forms foundation of the suit. If that cause of
action enables a person to ask for a larger and
broader relief than to which he had limited his claim,
he cannot thereafter seek the recovery of the
balance of the cause of action by independent
proceedings. This principle has been also settled by
the Apex Court in Sidramappa versus Rajashetty, AIR
1970 SC 1059.
State Of Haryana & Ors vs Navneet Verma on 31 October, 2007
23. The power of the Government in abolishing a
post and the role of the Court for interference has
succinctly been summarized by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court after taking into consideration
r the majority of the
earlier judgments in State of Haryana and others versus
Navneet Verma (2008) 2 SCC 65 wherein it was
observed as under:-
Section 141 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
The Land Acquisition Act, 1894
Avinash Nagra vs Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti Etc on 30 September, 1996
17. Where the principle of constructive res judicata
would apply to writ petition was subject matter of
consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Avinash Nagra vs. Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti and
others, (1997) 2 SCC 534 wherein it was held as under: