TARUN CHATTERJEE
VIVEKANANDA NIDHI – Appellant
Versus
ASHIMA GOSWAMI – Respondent
( 1 ) THE opposite party Smt. Ashima Goswami as a plaintiff instituted a suit against the petitioners for declaration and for permanent injunction. This suit was filed in the 2nd Court of the Munsif, at Alipore, 24 parganas (south) which was registered as title suit No. 359 of 1991. The petitioners entered appearance in the suit and here contesting the same by filing their written statement and additional written statement wherein one of the pleas was that the Munsif, 2nd Court at Alipore had no jurisdiction to try the suit on the ground that the valuation of the suit property exceeded the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Munsif, 2nd Court at Alipore. It appears from record that on 26th October, 1995 the petitioners filed an application under Order 7, Rule 11 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for necessary order necessary order for rejection of the plaint in limine for its inherent defects. The said application under Order 7, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure was disposed of by the Munsif, 2nd Court at Alipore, district 24 Parganas. (South) by giving liberty to the opposite party to take steps for amendment of the plaint if the she
Ramdutt v. K. D. Sesoon and Co.
Simadri Panda v. Durgari China Aparna
M/s Patel Construction Co. Ltd. v. M/s. Shah Roychand Amulkh
Thirmala Reddy Mahalakshamma v. Mulkhari Muralidharan Rao
Edupuganti Rao Memorial High School Committee v. Poturs Atharyya
REFERRED TO : Benishan Mohonlal Khetan v. Mahadeo Tukaram Borkar
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.