Exclusive HOLI Discounts!
Get Courses and Combos at Upto 50% OFF!
Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

kavita podwal (superintendent of central excise)     12 November 2013

Rule 10 of cpc

Hi, I am a Law graduate, however i am not practising therefore do not know procedures.  I am party in person in a suit for permanent injunction instituted by a person ( hereinafter referred as A).    I am the defendant.  He has filed a suit for permanent injunction and also IA for temporary injunction , however he did not get the temporary injunction or status quo prayed by him.  Thereafter he has again filed a suit for permanent injunction and temporary injunction in respect of the same property in another Court against me again praying for permanent injunction and he has also managed to get a temporary injunction ex-parte.  I am of the opinion that the subsequent suit is hit by the principles of Sec 10 Res subjudice.  i would like advise on my further course of action.  How do i bring this informaton to the knowledge of the Hon'ble Court



Learning

 2 Replies

cyberlawyer (barrister)     12 November 2013

You were set exparte in the IA of subsquent suit ?. What prevented you from contesting it?

OK past is past. 

Now file set aside application in the subsequent suit along with affidavit stating the reasons to allow your petition. You can even state the pendancy of the former suit in another court in the petition itself . File certified copies of plaint , affidavit petition of temporary injunction made in the former suit. If the Judge directes you to file a seperate petition a petition under sec. 10 CPC to dismiss the suit on the grounds of RES SUBJUDICE will be maintainable .

BTW you have titled your thread as rule 10. It is actually Section 10

Good luck...


kavita podwal (superintendent of central excise)     12 November 2013

thanks for the immediate reply, it encourages law graduates like me.  i had advanced the hearing and filed my written statement and mainly concentrated on getting to the knowledge of the Court that A has approached with unclean hands.  i have also filed Order 39 Rule 4 to vacate the injunction and tomorrow i am filing the objections to Order 39 Rule 1 & 2.  i was under the impression that Order 39 Rule 4 was sufficient, however i have been informed to object to the temporary injunction by A.  the complicated procedure is time consuming, however i am not able to understand is it not enough that i have brought to the knowledge of the Court that the said suit of A is hit by principles of Sec 10, why should i once again contest the suit as though it is a fresh one.  my grievance is that the Court is also wasting its time on multiplicity of suit, when the said time cud be fruitfully used to consider other pressing matters.  Can the Court not use its inherant powers and nip such vexatious suits in the bud itself. 


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register