Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.SATHISH KUMAR
Kamalavathi – Appellant
Versus
G. Balasundar – Respondent
ORDER :
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
1. Challenging the impugned Order granting permission to the respondent to withdraw the suit and file a fresh suit on the same cause of action, the present revision petition has been filed.
2. The respondent has filed a suit for bare injunction claiming to be in possession of the property. The respondent claim right over the property on the basis of an unregistered Will dated 31.08.2010 said to have been executed by his grand father and he is in possession of the property. However, the defendant made an attempt to encroach over the property in the year 2919. Hence, the respondent filed the suit for permanent injunction. The suit was contested by the defendant and P.W.1 in his evidence has admitted that he was not in possession of the property from the year 2014. At this stage, an application has been taken out by the respondent to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action. The said application has been allowed by the trial Court. Challenging the same, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the very application filed for withdrawal of the sui
A party may not withdraw a suit for injunction to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action if contradictions undermine the basis for the claim.
Withdrawal of a suit requires sufficient grounds as per Order XXIII, Rule 1(3) of CPC, and belated applications may be dismissed to prevent abuse of process.
Withdrawal of a suit at the appellate stage is discretionary and cannot be used to evade adverse findings from the trial court.
Court must record satisfaction regarding formal defects or sufficient grounds for allowing withdrawal of a suit as stated under Order XXIII Rule 1 CPC.
Court has discretion to permit withdrawal of a suit under CPC, but must ensure sufficient grounds exist; mere counsel error does not qualify if it alters the suit's essence.
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
