SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(SC) 1853

B.SUDERSHAN REDDY, J.M.PANCHAL
DWARIKA PRASAD – Appellant
Versus
RAMESHWAR DAYAL KHANDELWAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Anoop G.Chaudhary, JUNE CHA

Judgement Key Points

What is the applicability of Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure when a prior application under Order 7, Rule 11, CPC, which also raised the issue of a pending suit, was rejected?

Key Points: - The appeal challenges the High Court's judgment confirming the rejection of an application filed by the appellant under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure to stay a suit (!) . - The original plaintiff filed a suit to declare a Sale Deed invalid and illegal and sought an injunction against alienating ancestral property (!) . - The appellant filed an application under Order 7, Rule 11, CPC, to reject the plaint for not disclosing a cause of action, which was rejected by the Trial Court (!) . - The appellant then filed an application under Section 10 of the CPC to stay the proceedings of a subsequent suit, which was also rejected by the Trial Court (!) . - The Trial Court had previously rejected an application under Order 7, Rule 11, CPC, noting that the earlier suit was at the stage of recording evidence and the application was filed to delay proceedings (!) . - The reasons for staying the proceedings, as mentioned in the Section 10 application, were also part of the earlier Order 7, Rule 11, CPC application (!) . - The Court found that the High Court was justified in not entertaining the prayer made under Section 10 of the CPC, given the reasons indicated by the Trial Court in its earlier order (!) . - The appeal was dismissed as no grounds were made out to interfere with the impugned judgment (!) (!) . - Leave was granted in the appeal (!) .

What is the applicability of Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure when a prior application under Order 7, Rule 11, CPC, which also raised the issue of a pending suit, was rejected?


J. M. PANCHAL, J.

( 1 ) LEAVE granted.

( 2 ) CHALLENGE in this appeal by special leave is to the judgment dated October 26, 2007, rendered by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Gwalior in Writ petition No. 5073 of 2007, by which the order dated July 23, 2007, passed by the learned IVth Additional District Judge, Gwalior in Civil Suit No. 35-A of 2006 rejecting the application filed by the appellant under Section 10 of the Code of Civil procedure to stay the suit, is confirmed.

( 3 ) THE relevant facts, which emerge from the record of the case are as under ; the respondent No. 1 herein is the original plaintiff. He has filed suit to declare that Sale Deed dated July 12, 2004 executed by the appellant and original defendant nos. 2 and 3 in favour of original defendant No. 4 is invalid and illegal. He has also prayed the Court to injunct the appellant and original defendant Nos. 2 and 3 from alienating the ancestral suit property. In the plaint it is stated that the property in dispute belonged to his father and the appellant as well as grandfather of the original defendant Nos. 2 and 3 and defendant Nos. 5 to 8. According to the plaint Ghisalal, who was owner of the property,





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top