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

KASLIWAL,N.M. (J)
P.A. OOMMEN – Appellant
Versus
MORAN MAR BASELIUS MARTHOMA MATHEWSI&ORS – Respondent


Advocates:
E. M. S. ANAM

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 1 of 6

PETITIONER:

P.A. OOMMEN

Vs.

RESPONDENT:

MORAN MAR BASELIUS MARTHOMA

DATE OF JUDGMENT17/07/1992

BENCH:

KASLIWAL, N.M. (J)

BENCH:

KASLIWAL, N.M. (J)

RAMASWAMY, K.

CITATION:

1992 AIR 1977 1992 SCR (3) 548

1992 SCC (3) 503 JT 1992 (4) 141

1992 SCALE (2)40

ACT:

Limitatior, Act 1963 :

S. 12-Exclusion of time taken in obtaining copy of

judgment appealed from-Applicability of Order XLI Rule 1-

Suit tried alongwith another suit-Common judgment dismissing

the suit-Appeal-Time taken in obtaining copy of judgment by

plaintiffs in one suit-Whether plaintiffs in the other suit

entitled to claim the benefit for purposes of limitation.

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 :

Order XLI Rule 1-Object and applicability of-Whether

controls the provisions under the Limitation Act.

HEADNOTE:

The appellant and Respondents Nos. 6 and 9 filed a suit

in the District Court. The suit was transferred to a Sub-

Judge, who tried it along with another suit filed by other

plaintiffs. By a common judgment he dismissed the

transferred suit as also the other suit. The plaintiffs

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