Cpc G. Surya Narayanan Mhc Advt: ORDER XXII RULE 5, SECTION 211 –

[1/4, 15:18] Cpc G. Surya Narayanan Mhc Advt: ORDER XXII RULE 5, SECTION 211 –

2010 (2) SCJ 152

SURESH KUMAR BANSAL VS. KRISHNA BANSAL AND ANOTHER

Determination of Legal representative under this order is only for conducting the legal proceedings – it will not operate as res judicata on the rival claims to be tried independently in the proceedings.

SECTION 20 –

2010 (2) SCJ 612

GODREJ SARA LEE LTD., VS. RECKITT BENCKISER AUSTRALIA PVT. LTDS., AND ANOTHER

Cause of action is the cancellation of registered design of the appellant in West Bengal – Delhi High Court has no jurisdiction to entertain appeal – order set aside held Calcutta High Court has jurisdiction to entertain appeal.

SECTION 35 – B, ORDER XVII RULE 1 –

2010 (2) SCJ 621

MANOHAR SINGH VS. D.S. SHARMA AND ANOTHER

Non-payment of cost for adjournment to cross examine the witness present in Court – held suit cannot be dismissed for non payment of cost – only cross examination can be closed or further prosecution can be prohibited.
[1/5, 16:40] Cpc G. Surya Narayanan Mhc Advt: SECTION 92 –

2010 (2) SCJ 340

SRI JEYARAM EDUCATIONAL TRUST AND OTHERS VS. A.G.SYED MOHIDEEN AND OTHERS

Revision against rejection of memo to transfer the suit to Principal Sub Ordinate Judge, Cuddalore from District Judge, held pecuniary limits do not apply to suits under Section 92 CPC – when jurisdiction is conferred by State Government Notification for Section 92 or similar provisions, the said Court and the District court will have concurrent jurisdiction.

SECTION 100 –

2010 (2) SCJ 125

S.B. MINERALS VS. MSPL LTD.,

Order admitting second appeal is not a final or interlocutory order – High Court merely entertains an appeal for hearing.

SECTION 115, ORDER XXII RULE 3, ORDER XXIII RULE 1 –

2010 (2) SCJ 182

DWARIKA PRASAD VS. NIRMALA AND OTHERS

Share of the plaintiff will devolve on the heir, Court shall proceed with the suit by impleading legal representative – Trial Court shall verify what prompted the Original Plaintiff to withdraw the suit – beneficiary of a fraud in Trial Court and High Court cannot invoke discretionary jurisdiction of High Court.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Call Now ButtonCALL ME