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

2006 Supreme(Del) 922

MANJU GOEL
Jaideep Bajaj – Appellant
Versus
Shashi Bajaj – Respondent


Advocates:
A. K. Thakur, C. K. Rai and R. K. Mishra, for Plaintiff; H. L. Narula, for Defendant No. 1.

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - The suit is barred under Order 2, Rule 2, CPC because the plaintiff omitted to sue for cancellation of the relinquishment deed in the previous suit (!) (!) . - The withdrawal of the first suit without leave to file a fresh suit on the same subject matter leads to dismissal under Order 23, Rule 1(4)(b) CPC, as held by the court (!) (!) (!) . - The plaintiff’s claim for partition depends on cancellation of the relinquishment deed, which was not sought in the previous suit, rendering the second suit barred (!) (!) . - The first suit sought injunction and protection against dispossession; it did not include cancellation of the relinquishment deed or the memorandum of understanding (!) (!) . - The court dismissed the suit with costs on both issues, concluding both are barred (!) .

How to determine if a second suit is barred under Order 2, Rule 2, CPC?

What is the effect of withdrawing a suit without leave on the right to file a fresh suit under Order XXIII, Rule 1(4)(b) CPC?

What are the grounds on which a suit for partition can be barred due to non-suit of cancellation of a relinquishment deed?


Judgement

JUDGEMENT :- This judgement is to decide two preliminary issues being issues Nos. 1 and 2 which are as under :

"(1) Whether the suit is barred under the provisions of Order 2, Rule 2, CPC ? (OPP)

(2) Whether the suit is barred under Order 23, Rule 1(4)(b) CPC/(OPP)".

2. Briefly stated the story of the plaintiff in the present suit is as under :

Narain Das was the owner of property No. E-129-130, Amar Colony, Lajpat Nagar-IV, New Delhi. He died leaving behind five sons, namely, Shri Jugal Kishore, Shri Arjun Dev Bajaj, Shri Bal Kishan Bajaj, Shri Bhim Sen Bajaj and Shri Dina Nath Bajaj. By virtue of a family settlement between the Shri Jugal Kishore, Shri Arjun Dev Bajaj and Shri Bal Kishan Bajaj, Shri Bal Kishan Bajaj became the exclusive owner of the entire ground floor of property No. E-130, Amar Colony as well as for the entire second floor, third floor and terrace of the property bearing No. E-129, Amar Colony. The plaintiff is the son and defendant Nos. 1 and 2 are the widow and daughter of Bal Kishan Bajaj, who died intestate on 1-10-1999. The properties left behind by him were this half share in the property E-129-130, Amar Colony as mentioned above, hereinafter referre


























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