PRAKASH TATIA, DINESH MAHESHWARI
Sukh Dev – Appellant
Versus
Prakash Chandra – Respondent
Hon'ble TATIA, J.-The issue involved in these appeals is whether intra-court appeal lies against the order passed of the nature in writ jurisdiction by the learned Single Judge of this Court?
2. In D.B. Civil Special Appeal No.32/2010, the writ petition was labelled under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. This appeal is against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 17.12.2009 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11796/2009. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition after taking note of the fact that by impugned order of the trial court dated 12.10.2009, the trial court directed defendant-petitioner' for discovery of documents under Order 11 Rule 14, CPC as according to the plaintiff, those documents were in possession of the defendant. This rejection of the writ petition of the writ petitioner is under challenge in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No.32/2010. In the writ petition, the writ petitioner prayed that the impugned order of the trial court 12.10.2009 may be set aside and the application of the plaintiff-respondent under Order 11 Rule 14 read with Section 151 CPC may be rejected.
3. D.B. Civil Special Appeal No.10/2010 is against the or
3. Kishorilal vs. Sales Officer
17. Likmal News Papers vs. Shanker Prasad (1999) 6 SCC 275)
18. Baby vs. Travancore Devashram Board (1998) 8 SCC 310)
19. Ashok K. Jha & Ors. vs. Garden Silk Mills Limited & Am. (2009) 10 SCC 584)
21. Surya Dev Rai vs. Ram Chander Rai & Ors. (2003) 6 SCC 675 = RLW 2003(4) SC 523)
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.