Back
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
Montessori Education Society Regd – Appellant
Versus
Shaily Grover – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Tushar Rao Gedela, J.
Tushar Rao Gedela, J. (Oral)
[The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid mode]
CM APP No. 9351/2023
1. This is an application seeking exemption from filing certified copies of the annexures.
2. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
3. Application stands disposed of.
CM(M) 350/2023 & CM APP No. 9350/2023
4. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the petition itself is being taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.
5. The petitioners challenge the order dated 13.12.2022 passed in CS DJ 989/2022 titled `Shaily Grover and Ors vs. Montessori Education Society Regd & Ors.' whereby the leave to institute the suit under Section 20 sub-Section (b) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short "CPC") was granted to the respondents/plaintiffs.
6. Mr. J.P. Sengh, learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the entire cause of action, even if it is taken to be on the statement contained in the plaint, reflects the fact that the whole issue relates to the elections which were conducted by the respondents/defendants at Ashok Vihar, in the office of the Society.
7. Learned senior counsel also submits that eve
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the requirements for obtaining leave to institute a suit in a particular Court of competent jurisdiction under Section 20(b) ....
The Court clarified the interpretation of Section 20(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure, emphasizing that the residence of one of the defendants is to be considered for territorial jurisdiction.
The principles governing condonation of delay emphasize the necessity of showing sufficient cause, where ignorance or negligence of parties is insufficient to justify delays in legal proceedings.
A High Court's jurisdiction under Article 226(2) requires that part of the cause of action arises within its territorial limits.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the issue of territorial jurisdiction can be tried as a preliminary issue under Order XIV Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Code.
The jurisdiction of the Central Administrative Tribunal must be established by where the cause of action arises, especially in online applications.
The court ruled that the High Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain writ petitions when the integral part of the cause of action arises outside its territorial limits, despite minor connections to th....
Prior final orders on territorial jurisdiction operate as res judicata in same suit, barring fresh challenges via subsequent superior court judgments on identical clauses; procedural defects bind unl....
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
