Back
BHARAT P. DESHPANDE
Sunita Devendra – Appellant
Versus
Sitadevi Deshprabhu – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. Both these civil revision applications challenging the same impugned order dtd. 16/8/2019 in Special Civil Suit No.89/2006 filed on 1/9/2006, are taken up for final disposal with the consent of the parties, at the stage of admission itself.
2. Heard Mr Parag Rao along with Mr A. Parrikar, learned counsel for the applicants in both the matters and learned Senior Counsel Shri Sudin Usgaonkar along with Shri Ashwin Ramani and Shri Shukr Usgaonkar, learned counsel for the respondents.
3. Applicants no.1 and 2 in Civil Revision Application No.46/2019 are original defendants no.2 and 4. Applicant since deceased through his LRs in Civil Revision Application No.47 of 2019 is the original defendant no.3. These defendants filed an application under Order XXIII Rule 1(4) along with Sec. 151 of CPC in Special Civil Suit No.89/2006 claiming therein that the said suit be dismissed as the plaintiff by abandoning their foundational claim in Special Civil Suit No.74/2007 are not entitled to pursue the present suit on almost identical reliefs and between the same parties.
4. The learned trial Court rejected both the applications by the impugned order on the ground that Order XXIII Rule 1(4)
An application for plaint rejection under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC only evaluates the plaint's contents without considering the defendant's defense. Res judicata principles need comprehensive analysis bey....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the duty of the court to recall and set aside decrees obtained by fraud or misrepresentation, and the power of the court to reject a plaint unde....
An independent suit challenging a consent decree is barred under Order XXIII Rule 3A of the C.P.C. if the allegations of fraud are predominantly about breach/non-compliance of the consent terms/conse....
The application for rejection of the plaint has to show that the suit is barred by law and the said bar should appear from the pleadings of the plaintiff itself. The court found that the learned Tria....
Object of Special Law of Family Courts Act is to decide matrimonial cases in a speedy manner.
Point of law: Once court accepts explanation as sufficient it is the result of positive exercise of discretion and normally the superior court should not disturb such finding, much less in revisiiona....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
