Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
A.C.BEHERA
Raj Kumar Saraff – Appellant
Versus
RAJ KUMAR SARAFF – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case and previous orders (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments presented by the parties (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. principles governing leave under section 92 of the c.p.c. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. court's reasoning against interference (Para 15) |
| 5. final decision on the revision (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
JUDGMENT :
A.C.BEHERA, J.
This revision under Section 115 of the C.P.C., 1908 has been filed by the petitioners against the Opposite Parties praying for setting aside the impugned order dated 26.12.2023 passed in C.S. No.01 of 2018 by the learned District Judge, Nuapada.
2. The petitioners and the Opposite Parties in this revision are the defendants and plaintiffs respectively in the suit vide C.S. No.01 of 2018 under Section 92 of the C.P.C., 1908 pending in the court of learned District Judge, Nuapada.
3. The factual backgrounds of this revision, which prompted the petitioners(defendants in the suit vide C.S. No.01 of 2018) for filing of the same is that, the Opposite Parties in this revision being the plaintiffs filed the suit vide C.S. No.01 of 2018 under Section 92 of the C.P.C., 1908 in the court of the learned District Judge, Nuapada against t
The court affirmed that once leave under Section 92 of the C.P.C. is granted and confirmed, it cannot be revoked without merit, highlighting procedural preclusion against repetitive challenges.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a Civil Revision Petition is not maintainable against an order declining leave to defend a suit under Order 37 of C.P.C., and only a regular a....
The court established that an order granting leave under Section 92 of CPC is judicial and subject to revision, contrary to previous interpretations.
An order granting leave under Section 92 of CPC is a judicial order, subject to revision, and requires necessary parties to be impleaded and interests to be established.
It is true that power under Section 92 CPC in respect of the same trust is exerciseable once and is not to be invoked by a fresh suit over and over again. A decree under Section 92 is result of a cla....
Court reaffirmed the obligation to maintain status quo in legal disputes to prevent harm until resolution, emphasizing judicial responsibility.
The rejection of a plaint under Order 7, Rule 11 must consider substantive issues and cannot be based solely on procedural grounds if differing issues are raised in subsequent petitions.
Point of law: Where Section 80 (2) C.P.C. provides that even though if the leave is granted yet no interim relief will be granted without hearing the State-respondents and in the instant case, the le....
Timely applications for plaint rejection are essential; attempting to reject a plaint after evidence closure undermines the judicial process and is considered an abuse of court resources.
The court emphasized that res judicata requires evidence examination and cannot be solely decided at the pre-trial stage, allowing grounds to be raised in written statements.
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
