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

1975 Supreme(All) 172

M.P.MEHROTRA
Jado Rai – Appellant
Versus
Onkar Prasad – Respondent


Advocates:
N. Sahai and B. Dayal, for Applicant; H.S. Joshi, for Respondent.

Judgement

ORDER :- This is the second revision. The courts below held, while deciding an issue framed thus in a pending suit "whether the suit is liable to be stayed?" that the suit was not liable to be stayed. That was the finding of the trial court and the lower revisional court affirmed the said finding. In the second revision before me it is contended that the courts below have not properly construed the pleadings in the two suits in question and they were too much pre-occupied with the ingredients of Section 10, Civil P. C. and they failed to consider the applicability of a Section 151, Civil P. C. In my opinion, the courts below were right in holding that the suit in question could not be stayed under Section 10, Civil P. C. This conclusion can be arrived at on the simple and undisputed ground that the court where the earlier suit was filed did not have the jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed in the subsequent suit. The first suit was filed in the court of the Munsif and the second suit was filed in the court of the District Judge. It is obvious that one of the basic ingredients of Section 10 has not been made out in the instant case, and, therefore, the suit could not b

























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