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

2002 Supreme(MP) 365

S.B.SAKRIKAR
VAN VIBHAG GRIH NIRMANS – Appellant
Versus
POONAM CHAND – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.S.GARG, G.M.CHAPHEKAR, R.D.Singh

S. B. SAKRIKAR, J.

( 1 ) BY the Court. Applicant/defendant has directed this revision against order dated. 9. 8. 2000 passed by the 6th Additional District Judge, Indore in c. S. 12-a/98 thereby directing registration of the suit on the application of non-applicant No. 1 to 9 (plaintiffs) in place of M. J. C. 12/98 registered on the application under Section 94 of the CPC for grant of urgent relief.

( 2 ) FACTS of the case in brief are that Non-applicants 1 to 9 (plaintiffs) have filed an application under Section 94 of the CPC for grant of urgent relief of injunction without filing the suit as the statutory period contemplated under section 80 (1), CPC r/w Section 94 of the M. P. Co-operative Societies Act was not complete. In reply to the application filed under Section 94 an objection was raised on behalf of the petitioner that alongwith said application, a draft plaint is not filed. In reply to aforesaid objection on behalf of non-applicant 1 to 9 (plaintiffs) a draft plaint was filed in the trial Court on 28. 9. 1990 and the case was thereafter heard on the application filed under Section 94 of CPC. The said application is still pending and no orders have been passed as yet. An







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