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

2016 Supreme(P&H) 820

DARSHAN SINGH
Mitta India Private Limited, Gaziabad – Appellant
Versus
Harpreet Industries, Ludhiana – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sanjiv Bansal

JUDGMENT :

DARSHAN SINGH, J.

1. The present revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 18.03.2016 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana, whereby the application moved by the petitioner-defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred as ‘CPC’) for rejection of plaint, has been dismissed.

2. I have heard Mr. Sanjiv Bansal, Advocate learned counsel for the petitioner and have carefully gone through the paper book.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Civil Court at Ludhiana has no territorial jurisdiction. The application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC can be moved at any stage of the suit. He further contended that the learned trial Court has not given any findings that the Civil Court at Ludhiana will have jurisdiction while dismissing the application. Thus, he contended that as the Civil Court at Ludhiana has no territorial jurisdiction so the application has been wrongly dismissed by the learned Trial Court.

4. I have duly considered the aforesaid contentions. I find that the present application has been moved with malafide intention just to delay the proceedings of the case. The issues in this





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