Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 15 (0.24 seconds)

Sameer Singh & Anr vs Abdul Rab & Ors on 14 October, 2014

The other decision placed reliance is Sameer Singh and Another Vs. Abdul Rab and Others , that availability of alternative remedy of statutory appeal is not a ground always not to exercise the power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and on facts the executing Court where does not adjudicate the lis between the parties on the ground it has become functus officio and when it pertains to jurisdictional error which is revisable under Section 115 CPC and after amendment to the Section with effect from 01.07.2002 the power is exercisable under Article 227 of the Constitution of India in holding the revision is maintainable.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 67 - D Misra - Full Document

Kamala & Ors vs K.T. Eshwara Sa & Ors on 29 April, 2008

Coming to the other ground on which the plaint rejected is under Order VII Rule 11 (a) CPC. It speaks that where the plaint on its reading does not disclose a cause of action. Cause of action is a bundle of essential facts and even as per Order VII Rule 1(e) what it speaks of the facts constituting cause of action and when it arose shall contain in the plaint, apart from Section 20 CPC speaks jurisdiction confers where cause of action in whole or part arises. The Apex Court in one of the expressions placed reliance in Kamala and Others Vs. K.T. Eshwara Sa and Others , held for application of barred by law or not to decide the conclusion to be drawn to the Court is only by seeing the plaint averments and nothing more at that stage as issues on merits of the mater would not be within the realm of the Court at that stage and that too when a mixed question of fact and law not only examination of plaint, but also evidence and order to be passed if at all in the earliest that to be taken up as a preliminary issue at best rather than rejection of the plaint by dwelling into with roving enquiry.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 203 - S B Sinha - Full Document

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

In so far as on ground of cause of action, this expression by referring to several other expressions held at Para 40, particularly from Para 139 at page 562 of Liverpool & London S.P. & I Association Limited Vs. M.V. Sea Success I , that whether a plaint discloses a cause of action or not is essentially a question of fact. But whether it does or does not must be found out from reading the plaint itself. For the said purpose the averments made in the plaint in its entirety must be held to be correct.
Supreme Court of India Cites 54 - Cited by 607 - S B Sinha - Full Document

C. Natrajan vs Ashim Bai & Anr on 11 October, 2007

The test is as to whether if any of the averments made in the plaint are taken to be correct in their entirety, a decree would be passed and by referring to C. Natrajan Vs. Ashim Bai , particularly at Para 8, it was observed that an application for rejection of the plaint can be filed if the allegations made in the plaint even if given face value in its entirety appear to be barred by any law.
Supreme Court of India Cites 23 - Cited by 223 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Kishore Kumar Khaitan & Anr vs Praveen Kumar Singh on 13 February, 2006

The other decision placed reliance is in Kishore Kumar Khaitan and Another Vs. Praveen Kumar Singh , where at Para 13 the Apex Court held that exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India behoved the High Court to consider whether the order of interim injunction is supported by necessary findings. The jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India may be restrictive in the sense that it is to invoke to correct errors of jurisdiction. But when a Court asks itself a wrong question or approaches the question in an improper manner, even if it comes to a finding of fact, which cannot be said to be one rendered with jurisdiction and it will still be amenable to correction at the hands of the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 148 - P K Balasubramanyan - Full Document
1   2 Next