RAMJI
04 March 2013 at 22:19
In a civil suit, one of the defendant has filed an I.A praying for REJECTION OF PLAINT. Now, plaintiff has filed COUNTER against the I.A, proceedings are on.....
It is most likely that I.A will be dismissed in next hearing as enquiries reflect now....so, defendant may get aggrieved....
Questions are
1. Can the defendant file an APPEAL against the dismissal of his I.A?...
2. If so, should he file in SAME COURT OR HIGH COURT?
3. On dismissal of I.A and irrespective of appeal of its appeal, will the court proceed with ORIGINAL SUIT?
4. On the same grounds of present IA filed by one of the defendant.... can the other defendants too file another IA for rejection of plaint? (just for delaying the suit..?)
5. other views pls
REgards
Ramji
GANGAM.RAJENDER.
04 March 2013 at 21:59
i was field a suit ,in that suit suddenly defendent has dead,can i file fresh suit against the legal hairs of the defendents or legal hairs can be added in same suit.if possible explain the procedure how to be added the defendents in place of deceased defendent.pls expl sir
Nishant Jojhra
04 March 2013 at 21:32
Can a grandson claim right in his grandfather's self acquired property? How?
How can a son claim right in his father's self acquired property when his father intends to gift the whole property to his second son?
KmeduVishnu
04 March 2013 at 20:12
Dear Experts,
Whether a son being an Advocate can appear for his own Father before the court?
Is there any bar under law?
Kindly clarify these issues....
Thanks in Advance.
Member (Account Deleted)
04 March 2013 at 17:59
Radhe shyam gupta filed the suit for the recovery on jan.10 , 1999 against Lal Bihari of the amount 2 lakh as sale price of the house which is in dispute situated in Ranchi. Radhe shyam also produced document dated September 1, 1998 the house in question of which he was the owner was transferred to lal bihari which the lal bihari had promised to pay but he did not pay the amount and continued to remain in possession which he should have surrendered for having not paid the said amount.The suit was contested by the lal bihari on ground that he was the tenant under radhe shyam and was already in possession. He also pleaded that document dated sept.1 ,1998 was obtained by fraud and hence void under ICA(contract act) ,1872 as well.
The suit was dismissed by the trial court judge senior div, ranchi in jan.2001 on the finding that the house in question was at no stage sold by radhe shyam to lal bihari and consequently he was not entitled to recover the said amount from lal bihari as sale price as document in question was only an agreement for sale and not a sale-deed that the agreement was without consideration and was hit by the provisions of ICA,1872. This judgment of trial court was upheld by learned district judge, ranchi in an appeal by radhe shyam gupta. The lower appellate court also specifically reversed the trial court finding and held that lal bihari had failed to prove him to be tenant under the disputed land. These legal procedding terminated at that stage.
Radhe shyam however initiated new proceeding against lal bihari on the basis of the title. He pleaded that he was the owner of the land in question and Lal bihari who had already been held in the earlier suit that he was not the tenant on the disputed land in suit, was not entitled to retain possession. Whereas Lal Bihari claimed that the suit is barred by o.2 r.2 and barred by the time as well since he was in possession over the house in question for longer time of more than 12 years and had become owner of the land in suit by adverse possession.
The Trial Court namely Civil Judge Senior Division Ranchi, dismissed the suit by judgment in april,2005 with the finding that the suit was barred by 0.2 r.2. and was beyond time. In appeal, decided by Dist. Judge, Ranchi in mar, 2007 the findings recorded by trial court were reversed and the suit was decreed by stating it was not barred by o.2. r.2 nor was it beyond time. The Lal Bihari then filed a second appeal in the High Court of Ranchi which got dismissed in 2012, so the matter is before the Supreme Court Now.
Please suggest arguments on behalf of the appellant in SC i.e. lal bihari?
ramesh jani
04 March 2013 at 16:23
i have purchase property from public auction and after that a have to come to know that old owner has pending dues of electicity bills and connection was disconnect due to non payment of due, now i am appling for new connection and p.g.v.c.l is now demanding due of old owner from me. i think before few month ago on 04.11.12 high court or suprim court abrogate the order of apurva chemicals v/s daxin guj. vij co ltd. and release the connection to new owner and do not demand any dues of old owner from new owner. if any decision is their please give me full order copy.
surjit singh
04 March 2013 at 15:04
what is the time limit to file review application against judgement made in writ petition under article 226 of constitution.
R.Ranganathan
04 March 2013 at 13:54
In the case of a takeover of mortgage loan in which MOTD is registered then how will the new Bank claim charge over the already mortgaged property. Whether the existing MOTD has to be discharged and fresh MOTD has to be executed? What about the expenses and other charges?
Srinivas Jerripothula
04 March 2013 at 12:31
Hi All,
Hi everyone, i am srinivas J.
On which grounds a surplus land will be registered. What the mitigants and Deviations need to be taken before registering surplus land. Please let me know.
Thanks,
J. Srinivas
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Limitation period
A sends a legal notice to B informing him some position in respect of which B, if accepts the position has to keep quiet or to raise objection(s) if he has any. The legal notice, however,simply informs the position and does not mention any time limit within which B has to raise objections, if any. B duly receives the said notice sent by A but, inpite of having some objections to raise, cleverly keeps quiet for long time to raise such objections at an opportune time, if required.
What is the time limit in such a sitution within which B can raise objections, if any, and if B does not raise objections within such limit, A can assure himself that now B cannot raise any objection in future.
Experts may kindly advise legal position.