Back
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
Shri Vikram G. Tamaskar, J
Laljee Joshi – Appellant
Versus
Bhaiyyaram – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's authority to invoke suo motu reviews under specified legal provisions. (Para 1 , 10 , 11) |
| 2. details of eviction proceedings under the previous legislation. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 8) |
| 3. legal requirements for rejecting a plaint under order 7 rule 11 of the code. (Para 6 , 12 , 14) |
| 4. importance of the plaint's allegations without the need for the defendant's written statement. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 5. final directive for reconsideration of the application under order 7 rule 11 on its merits. (Para 18 , 19) |
1. During the course of arguments on 1-8-2007 Shri Vikram G. Tamaskar, learned counsel for the applicant had prayed that this Court should invoke the suo motu revisional jurisdiction under sub-section (1) of S.115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') and set aside the order dated 7-12-2001 as also quash the proceedings as being patently without jurisdiction. Before invoking such jurisdiction, learned counsel were called upon to address on the order dated 7-12-2001 rejecting the application under O. 7 R. 11 of the Code filed by the applicant herein for rejection of the plaint.
2. Learned counsel were heard.
3. Admitted facts in brie
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
