Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 22 (1.36 seconds)
Adarsh Kumar Puniyani vs Lajwanti Piplani on 8 December, 2015 cites

Zulfiquar Ali Khan (Dead) Through Lrs & ... vs Straw Products Limited & Ors. on 4 August, 2000

18. Similarly in Zulfiquar Ali Khan Vs. Straw Products Limited 87 (2000) DLT 76 it was observed that it is a notorious fact that to drag the case, a litigant often takes all sorts of false or legally untenable pleas and it was held that legal process should not be allowed to be misused by such persons and only such defence as give rise to clear and bona fide dispute or triable issues should be put to trial and not illusory or unnecessary or mala fide based on false or untenable pleas to delay the suit. It was yet further held that the Court is not bound to frame an issue on unnecessary or baseless pleas, thereby causing unnecessary and avoidable inconvenience to the parties and waste of valuable Court time.
Delhi High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 33 - J B Goel - Full Document

Liverpool & London S.P. & I Asson. Ltd vs M.V. Sea Success I & Anr on 20 November, 2003

"31. The procedure prescribed in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for disposal of suits provides for issues to be framed only on material propositions of law or fact which a plaintiff must allege in order to show a right to sue or a defendant must allege in order to constitute his defence. Else, Order 15 provides that where the parties are not found at issue on any question of law or fact, the Court should at once pronounce judgment. Once it is found that there is no defence as alleged of Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, merely because a bogey thereof is raised at the stage of framing of the issues or upon the respondents / plaintiffs filing an application for decree on admissions, would not call for framing of an issue. It has been held in T. Arivandandam Vs. T.V. Satyapal AIR 1977 SC 2421, Liverpool & London S.P. & I Association Vs. M.V. Sea Success I (2004) 9 SCC 512 and ITC Ltd. Vs. Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (1998) 2 SCC 70 that the pleadings have to be read meaningfully and if on such a reading, it is found that there is no lis to be tried and the claim or defence is ultimately one destined to doom, the Courts should not waste their time on trial of such cases, to the prejudice of deserving cases.
Supreme Court of India Cites 54 - Cited by 607 - S B Sinha - Full Document

T. Arivandandam vs T. V. Satyapal & Another on 14 October, 1977

"31. The procedure prescribed in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for disposal of suits provides for issues to be framed only on material propositions of law or fact which a plaintiff must allege in order to show a right to sue or a defendant must allege in order to constitute his defence. Else, Order 15 provides that where the parties are not found at issue on any question of law or fact, the Court should at once pronounce judgment. Once it is found that there is no defence as alleged of Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, merely because a bogey thereof is raised at the stage of framing of the issues or upon the respondents / plaintiffs filing an application for decree on admissions, would not call for framing of an issue. It has been held in T. Arivandandam Vs. T.V. Satyapal AIR 1977 SC 2421, Liverpool & London S.P. & I Association Vs. M.V. Sea Success I (2004) 9 SCC 512 and ITC Ltd. Vs. Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (1998) 2 SCC 70 that the pleadings have to be read meaningfully and if on such a reading, it is found that there is no lis to be tried and the claim or defence is ultimately one destined to doom, the Courts should not waste their time on trial of such cases, to the prejudice of deserving cases.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 1095 - V R Iyer - Full Document

I.T.C. Limited vs The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal & ... on 19 December, 1997

"31. The procedure prescribed in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for disposal of suits provides for issues to be framed only on material propositions of law or fact which a plaintiff must allege in order to show a right to sue or a defendant must allege in order to constitute his defence. Else, Order 15 provides that where the parties are not found at issue on any question of law or fact, the Court should at once pronounce judgment. Once it is found that there is no defence as alleged of Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, merely because a bogey thereof is raised at the stage of framing of the issues or upon the respondents / plaintiffs filing an application for decree on admissions, would not call for framing of an issue. It has been held in T. Arivandandam Vs. T.V. Satyapal AIR 1977 SC 2421, Liverpool & London S.P. & I Association Vs. M.V. Sea Success I (2004) 9 SCC 512 and ITC Ltd. Vs. Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (1998) 2 SCC 70 that the pleadings have to be read meaningfully and if on such a reading, it is found that there is no lis to be tried and the claim or defence is ultimately one destined to doom, the Courts should not waste their time on trial of such cases, to the prejudice of deserving cases.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 509 - M J Rao - Full Document
1   2 3 Next