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

1989 Supreme(Ori) 31

P.C.MISRA, S.C.MOHAPATRA
PADMALAYA PANDA – Appellant
Versus
MASINATH MOHANTY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.N.MISHRA, A.S.NANDY, B.C.PANDEY, K.N.Sinha, S.D.Das

P. C. MISRA, J.

( 1 ) THIS case has come before this Bench on being referred for resolving a conflict in some decisions of the learned single Judges of this Court with regard to the question whether after the order rejecting a plaint under Order 7, Rule 11 of the C. P. C. (hereinafter referred to as the `code'), which is appealable, an application under Section 151 of the Code for setting aside or recalling the order would be entertainable by the trial Court. The petitioner filed M. S. No. 54/ 83 in the Court of Subordinate Judge, Berhampur which was rejected under Order 7, Rule 11, C. P. C. for non-payment of deficit court-fee. The plaintiff filed an application under Section 151, C. P. C. praying for setting aside the order of dismissal and for restoration of the suit in M. J. C. No. 203/83 which was rejected as not maintainable. The plaintiff-petitioner has filed this revision contending inter alia that the learned trial court has failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in it by law by refusing to entertain the application under Section 151 of the Code, as according to him, there is no other remedy available to meet such a contingency. Whether the court in exercise of its inhere






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