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

1998 Supreme(P&H) 416

SWATANTER KUMAR
Chandgi – Appellant
Versus
Mehar Chand – Respondent


Judgment

1. Whether the expression at any stage or later stage on the hand and the suit is called on for hearing or before such hearing used in different provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure are synonymous to each or admit definite distinction in their meaning and scope, is the basic question that falls for consideration in this revision petition.

2. Before entering into the realm of various judgments on this aspects, it will be appropriate to have a composite picture of the facts giving rise to this revision petition.Plaintiff Chandgi had instituted a suit for possession against Mehar Chand and others. The parties were at issue in regard to various aspects forming the subject matter of the suit. The learned trial Court on the pleadings of the parties, framed the following issues :-

(i) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief of permanent injunction in respect of the suit property as mentioned in the Head Note of the plaint? OPP.(ii) Whether the plaintiff is precluded from filing this suit in view of the provisions of Order 23, Rule 1, C.P.C.? OPD.(iii) Whether the suit of the plaintiff is time barred? OPD.(iv) Whether the suit of the plaintiff is barred by principle of















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