The impugned order passed by High Court was set aside and the previous judgments of the lower courts were validated.
Honorable Supreme Court read Order 38 Rule 5 of C.P.C carefully and reversed the judgment given by the High Court.
The Court once again read the provisions, Order 14 Rule 1 and Order 14 Rule 5 under C.P.C. The court after referring the provisions stated that the court can amend issues at any stage of the suit which my be out of necessity to determine the controve
The High Court dismissed the revision. It was observed that the court has full authority to order the attachment of property which is outside its jurisdiction as laid down in the rules of CPC.
The petition was dismissed as there was no merits in the review petition.
The High Court set aside the order of the learned single judge. The court observed that the respondent had filed a case seeking permanent injunction so they need to stand on their own instead of discovering the documents about the ownership title of
The Supreme Court held that under Section 9 of the Code, the civil court shall have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature and one has the right to bring a suit of civil nature of one’s choice however frivolous the claim may be, unless it is
It was held that judged from the above angle, clause (68) of the 1934 Constitution cannot be said to be a fair one, in as much as the said clause provided for representation Parish Church wise. We took note of the contention urged on behalf of the Pa
The Supreme Court held that under Section 9 of the Code, the civil court shall have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature and one has the right to bring a suit of civil nature of one’s choice however frivolous the claim may be, unless it i
