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

1989 Supreme(Ori) 131

D.P.MOHAPATRA, ARIJIT PASAYAT
SHYAMA SUNDAR MOHAPATRA – Appellant
Versus
JANAKI BALLAV PATNAIK – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.N.JENA, M.N.DASGUPTA, S.C.LAL

D. P. MOHAPATRA, J.

( 1 ) THE point that arises for decision in this appeal is whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the issue relating to jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the suit in respect of defendant No. 4 should be tried as a preliminary issue. The question having been answered in the negative by the learned trial Judge, defendant No. 4 in the suit filed this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the Orissa High Court challenging the said order of the learned trial Judge.

( 2 ) ORIGINAL Suit No. 1 of 1987 was filed by the respondent No. 1 against the appellant and respondents 2 to 4 claiming damages and special damages for publishing certain articles allegedly containing scandalous and libellous matters imputing the plaintiff's moral character. The suit was initially filed in the court of the Subordinate Judge, Bhubaneswar which has transferred subsequently to this Court. It is now pending before Justice Shri K. P. Mohapatra for trial. In the suit one of the issues framed is to the effect "5. Has the Court jurisdiction to entertain the suit in respect of the defendant No. 4 ?". The appellant filed an application under Order 14, Rule 2, Civil Pro









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