Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.26 seconds)

Sai Udyog (Pvt. Ltd.), Raipur And Ors. vs Central Bank Of India, Raipur on 8 October, 1997

5. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the learned trial Judge has fallen into error by granting stay of the suit as the same runs counter to the language used under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Her submission is that Section 10 of the Code contemplates stay of a suit when the matter is directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the parties, or between the parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title where such suit is pending in the same or any other Court in India having jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed or in any Court beyond the limits of India established or continued by the Central Government and having like jurisdiction, or before the Supreme Court and that being not the case, no order of stay should have been passed. It is her further submission that criminal proceeding is not a suit, the concept of stay is not attracted. She has placed reliance on the decision rendered in the case of Sai Udyog (Pvt.) Ltd., Raipur and Ors. v. Central Bank of India, Raipur, AIR 1998 MP 191, wherein the learned Single Judge has held as under:--
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

State Of Rajasthan vs M/S.Kalyan Sundaram Cement Industries ... on 12 February, 1996

The rival contentions need not detain me for long as the Apex Court in the decision rendered in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Kalyan Sundaram Cement Industries Ltd., 1996 (II) MPWN Short Note 61 (P. No. 92) has held that suit for recovery of amount of dishonoured cheques cannot be stayed even though Criminal proceeding is pending. I may profitably quote their Lordships :
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 38 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document
1