Code of Civil Procedure 1908
30th Jan, 2017
The Delhi High Court held that to invoke review jurisdiction, there must be a glaring omission, patent mistake or a grave error in the impugned judgment. An order or decision or judgment cannot be corrected […]
10th Jan, 2017
When there is an allegation of fraud by non-disclosure of necessary and relevant facts or concealment of material facts, it must be inquired into. It is only after evidence is led coupled with intent to […]
9th Jan, 2017
The purpose of Order 8 Rule 10 CPC is to expedite the trial and not penalise the defendant upon non-filing of the written statement. The courts can invoke its provisions to curb dilatory tactic, often […]
3rd Apr, 2016
In the context of breach of an interim order, the order can be void or nullity but, the consequences flowing from its non compliance or breach cannot be avoided by the party by advancing the […]
31st Jan, 2016
There is no provision parallel to the provision contained in Order 9 Rule 9(1) Code of Civil Procedure which contains a prohibition that if a suit is dismissed in default of the Plaintiff under Order […]
11th Jan, 2016
It is well settled that the first appellate court, under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, is the last court of facts unless the findings are based on evidence or are perverse. Further, […]
11th Jan, 2016
The provision for territorial jurisdiction has to be interpreted consistent with the object of facilitating remedies for the victims of accidents. Hyper technical approach in such matters can hardly be appreciated. There is no bar […]
9th Dec, 2015
For expending the power under Order 41 Rule 27 the Appellate Court has to read the words “or for any other substantial cause” with the word “requires”, which is set out at the commencement of […]
31st Oct, 2015
Whenever parties agree for arbitration and even name a specific arbitrator with no specific provision for appointment of another arbitrator on the recusal/withdrawal of the said arbitrator, the said omission is made up by Section […]
11th Oct, 2015
Where the applicability of Order 37 itself is in question, grant of leave to defend may be permissible. The Court before passing a decree is entitled to take into consideration the consequences therefor. The Courts […]
6th Sep, 2015
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Court, at no stage, can act blindly or mechanically. While enabling the Court to pronounce judgment in a situation where no Written Statement is filed by the defendant, […]
23rd Aug, 2015
Judgment on admission is not a matter of right and rather is a matter of discretion of the Court. Where the defendants have raised objections which go to the root of the case, it would […]