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

1960 Supreme(Guj) 104

V.B.RAJU
MINOR BHOPO FAKIRBHAI – Appellant
Versus
MANI D/o JIJIBHAI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: AKSHAY H.MEHTA, MUKUND M.THAKUR

V. B. RAJU, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a civil revision application by the original defendants Nos. 1 and 2 in Suit No. 90 of 1959 challenging the order of the 5th Joint Civil Judge Senior Division ordering that this suit should be consolidated with suit No. 11 of 1959 notwithstanding their objections and the objections of defts. Nos. 4 to 7 and ordering that the evidence of both the suits be recorded in the former suit. It is contended by the applicants that two of the parties to one of the suits are not parties to the second suit.

( 2 ) THE learned counsel for the opponents raises a preliminary objection and contends that this application does not lie as it does not fall within the ambit of sec. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure because no case has been decided by a subordinate Court. He relies on a Full Bench decision of the Allahabad High Court in Gupta and Co. v. Kripa Ram Bros A. I. R. 1934 Allahabad 620 and contends that although the word case does not necessarily mean a suit and may include interlocutory orders in the instant case no case has been decided by the lower Court. The learned Judges of the Allahabad High Court have observed as under :the word case is not an exact equivalen






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