Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 29 (0.68 seconds)
M/S. Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited vs A. Anand Prasad on 10 December, 2025 cites

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

7.8. Thus, considering the over all facts and circumstance of the case, the suit filed by the plaintiff is vexatious, frivolous and nothing but an abuse of process of law and court. Considering the law laid down by Page 38 of 49 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/12/2025 05:00:35 pm ) S.A.No.314 of 2023 the Hon'ble Supreme Court in catena of decisiions referred above, more particularly in the case of T.Arivanantham (supra), in which it is pointed out that the suit being vexatious and frivolous, the plaint is required to be rejected in exercise of powers under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. In the above referred judgment, it is pointed out that, “the ritual of repeating a word or creation of an illusion in the plaint can certainly be unravelled and exposed by the Court while dealing with an application under Order 7 Rule 11 (a) CPC”. As observed herein above, the plaint is vexatious , frivolous, merit less and nothing but an abuse of process of law and Court. Therefore, this is a fit case to exercise the powers under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC. The first appellate court had materially erred in not rejecting the plaint in exercise of powers under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 1095 - V R Iyer - Full Document
1   2 3 Next