Back
V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
Jayakumar – Appellant
Versus
Varadharajan – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 21.10.2019 made in I.A.No.1004 of 2017 in O.S.No.166 of 2008 on the file of the learned District Munsif Court, Jayankondam.)
1. The present Civil Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 21.10.2019 made in I.A.No.1004 of 2017 in O.S.No.166 of 2008 on the file of the learned District Munsif Court, Jayankondam.
2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:-
The petitioners are the defendants 4 to 7 and the 1st respondent is the plaintiff and the 2nd respondent is the 1st defendant in O.S.No.166 of 2008. The suit has been filed for permanent injunction restraining the petitioners and 2nd respondent and others from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property and written statement was also filed. Pending suit, the 1st respondent / plaintiff filed I.A.No.1004 of 2017 to permit him to withdraw the suit with a liberty to file a fresh suit stating that during the pendency of the suit, the petitioners / defendants had alienated certain property to the 3rd parties. A c
The main legal point established in the judgment is that withdrawal of a suit is not permissible in the absence of fatal defects, and the plaintiff's conduct and intention in seeking withdrawal are c....
Withdrawal of a suit at the appellate stage is discretionary and cannot be used to evade adverse findings from the trial court.
The court established that a plaintiff seeking to withdraw a suit under Order 23 Rule 1(3) C.P.C. must clearly demonstrate the existence of formal defects or sufficient grounds, and failure to do so ....
A plaintiff may withdraw a suit under Order XXIII Rule 1 if formal defects are established; however, courts have discretion to deny withdrawal if satisfactory reasons are not presented.
The court established that withdrawal of a suit under Order XXIII Rule 1 requires the court to be satisfied with the grounds for allowing a fresh suit on the same cause of action.
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
