C P C Archives - Page 18 of 51 - Supreme Court of India Judgements

March 12, 2025 6:03 pm

(CPC) – Or 41 R 4 and 27 – Suit for declaration of title and for recovery of possession – One of several plaintiff or defendants may obtain reversal of whole decree where it proceeds on ground common to all – Plaintiff has not made out any case for declaration of title over the disputed property in her favour – Appeal dismissed.

Sep 12, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH P. ISHWARI BAI — Appellant Vs. ANJANI BAI AND ANOTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and B.R. Gavai, JJ. ) Civil…

C P C

(CPC) – Order 7 Rule 11(d) – Guwahati Municipal Corporation Act, 1971- High Court without taking note of these aspects of the matter has wrongly invoked the provisions contained in Order VII Rule 11 (d) of the Civil Procedure Code to reject the plaint, when in the instant facts there is neither express nor implied bar under any law – On the other hand, the learned Munsif was justified in passing the order holding the suit to be maintainable

Aug 14, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RATUL MAHANTA — Appellant Vs. NIRMALENDU SAHA — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 4627 of…

C P C

Res judicata, rejection of plaint – “Since an adjudication of the plea of res judicata requires consideration of the pleadings, issues and decision in the ‘previous suit’, such a plea will be beyond the scope of Order 7 Rule 11 (d), where only the statements in the plaint will have to be perused.”

Aug 10, 2021 sclaw

“Since an adjudication of the plea of res judicata requires consideration of the pleadings, issues and decision in the ‘previous suit’, such a plea will be beyond the scope of…

C P C

Exparte decree against minor – Appointment of guardian – High Court found that the exparte decree was a nullity, as it was passed against a minor without the minor being represented by a guardian duly appointed in terms of the procedure contemplated under Order 32, Rule 3 of the Code – Therefore, the High Court, exercising its power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution, set aside the exparte decree itself . ORDER UPHELD

Aug 8, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH K.P. NATARAJAN AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. MUTHALAMMAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ. ) Special Leave…

C P C

(CPC) – Order 7 Rule 11(d) – Once Plaint is rejected under Order 7 Rule 11(d) there is no occasion to direct that an amendment be made to the plaint.

Aug 8, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SAYYED AYAZ ALI — Appellant Vs. PRAKASH G. GOYAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and M. R. Shah,…

C P C

(CPC) – Or 41 R 22 – Challenge to adverse findings of court – Cross-objection not necessary HELD it is sufficient to raise a challenge to an adverse finding of the court of first instance before the appellate court without a cross objection.

Aug 7, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHRI SAURAV JAIN AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. M/S A. B. P. DESIGN AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud…

C P C

(CPC) – Order 23 Rule 3A – Bar to suit – A party to a consent decree based on a compromise to challenge the compromise decree on the ground that the decree was not lawful, i.e., it was void or voidable has to approach the same court, which recorded the compromise and a separate suit challenging the consent decree has been held to be not maintainable.

Jul 4, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH R. JANAKIAMMAL AND S.R. SOMASUNDARAM AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. S.K. KUMARASAMY(DECEASED) THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan…

C P C

CPC- In a money suit, the Court must invariably resort to Order XXI Rule 11, ensuring immediate execution of decree for payment of money on oral application. In a suit for payment of money, before settlement of issues, the defendant may be required to disclose his assets on oath, to the extent that he is being made liable in a suit. The Court may further, at any stage, in appropriate cases during the pendency of suit, using powers under Section 151 CPC, demand security to ensure satisfaction of any decree

Apr 25, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH RAHUL S SHAH — Appellant Vs. JINENDRA KUMAR GANDHI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S.A. Bobde, C.J.I., L. Nageswara Rao and S.…

C P C

Landlord and Tenant Relationship – Suit for possession – There is no evidence of taking premises on rent and it is admitted by defendant that he had not maintained any record of accounts of payment of rent, there is no base for holding that relationship of landlord and tenant is proved –

Mar 7, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MADAN MOHAN SINGH — Appellant Vs. VED PRAKASH ARYA — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash Reddy, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

C P C

CPC – Compliance of proviso to Section 17 is a Precondition for maintainability of application under Order 9 Rule 13 – Application under Order 9 Rule 13 can be allowed only when sufficient cause is made out to set aside the ex parte decree

Mar 7, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUBODH KUMAR — Appellant Vs. SHAMIM AHMED — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash Reddy, JJ. ) Civil Appeal Nos. 802-803…

You missed

Consumer Limitation

Limitation in consumer protection cases should be interpreted holistically, considering the continuing cause of action and prioritizing substantive rights over strict procedural time bars.

Mar 3, 2025 sclaw

C P C

A suit in representative capacity (Order 1, Rule 8 CPC) is not maintainable if lacking locus standi, and a prior decree (res judicata) bars subsequent suits on the same subject matter, notwithstanding varying reliefs.

Feb 16, 2025 sclaw

Stamp Act State Laws

Agreement to sell immovable property incurs stamp duty as deemed conveyance via implied/symbolic possession transfer, with duty applying to the agreement (instrument), not the sale (transaction).

Feb 16, 2025 sclaw

Accident

The Supreme Court emphasized that the goal is to ensure just and fair compensation, even if it exceeds the claimed amount. It recalculated the compensation, considering the claimant’s monthly income, future prospects, 40% permanent disability, medical expenses, attendant charges, special diet and transportation, pain and suffering, and loss of income during treatment. The final compensation was determined to be Rs. 17,82,825, modifying the awards of the MACT and High Court. The Civil Appeal was allowed, with interest as awarded by the Tribunal. This decision underscores the principle of providing fair compensation to accident victims based on comprehensive assessment of their losses and suffering.

Feb 9, 2025 sclaw

Category: C P C

You missed