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

1979 Supreme(Cal) 363

GANENDRA NARAYAN RAY
In re: Smt. Urmila Bajaj – Appellant
Versus
. – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Hrishikesh Ganguly for Petitioner

JUDGMENT

This Revisional application is directed against Order dated July 20, 1979, passed by the learned Munsif, 2nd Court, Alipore in Title Suit No. 115 of 1978. By the aforesaid impugned order the learned Munsif has disposed of an application under Order 23 Rule 1 of the C.P. Code made by the plaintiff opposite party. It appears that by the impugned order the learned Judge permitted the plaintiff to withdraw the suit unconditionally as prayed for by the plaintiff but on condition of payment at a cost of Rs. 50/- to the contesting defendants within a prescribed time. The defendant No. 2 intends to challenge this order in this Revisional application under section 115 of the C.P. Code.

2. Mr. Ganguly, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that after the amendment of Act 1976, the Code of Civil Procedure has undergone a change and under the present provision of the C.P.C. there was no occasion to withdraw the suit and on the said application under Order 23 Rule 1 of the C.P.C. the Court should have passed an order holding that the suit had been 'abandoned' by the plaintiff. Mr. Ganguly contended that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the expression 'withd









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