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

2008 Supreme(P&H) 1191

PERMOD KOHLI
Mr. Kuldip Singh & Others – Appellant
Versus
Kaushalya Devi & Others – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Rakesh Nehra, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

Permod Kohli, J. - Through the medium of this application, the appellants except No. 6 seek to withdraw this appeal.

2. Vide introluctory order dated 8.5.2008, learned counsel for the appellants sought some time to examine the question whether some of the appellants are entitled to withdraw the appeal without the consent of the others, in view of the specific provisions contained under sub-Rule (5) of Rule 1 of Order 23.

3. The counsel for the appellants has argued that the appellants are entitled to withdraw the appeal, without the consent of appellant No. 6. Reliance is placed on the following judgments :

Nilappagouda Goudappagouda and others v. Basangouda Sangangowda and others, AIR 1927 Bombay 244, wherein following observations have been made :

"This is an application by Appellant No. 6 to withdraw from the appeal. There are other Appellants Nos. 1 to 5 with whom he had joined in presenting this appeal. The application is opposed by the learned pleader for appellants Nos. 1 to 5 On the ground that under Order 23, Rule 1, the Court cannot allow a co-plaintiff to withdraw without the consent of the other plaintiffs. Under sub-Rule (1), however, it is open to the plaintiff

























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