CPC
Constructive Res Judicata Bars Grounds Omitted Due To Negligence : Supreme Court Summarises Principles
Constructive Res Judicata Applies Even To Grounds Omitted Due To Negligence, Inadvertence: Supreme CourtThe Supreme Court has summarised the governing principles of the doctrine of constructive res judicata, reiterating that parties are required to raise all grounds that "might and ought" to have been raised in earlier proceedings and cannot avoid the doctrine by attributing omissions...
Video Conferencing Rules Must Be Meaningfully Applied: P&H High Court Allows Examination Of Witness On VC
The Punjab and Haryana High Court set aside a trial court order refusing to permit the examination of a material witness through video conferencing, emphasizing that procedural rules must be applied in a manner that advances access to justice rather than defeats it.Justice Virinder Aggarwal said, "It is pertinent to note that the requisite technological infrastructure for conducting...
Parties Can Engage Private Expert In Commercial Suits But Admissibility Of Expert Report Subject To Proof At Trial: AP High Court
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that parties in civil and commercial disputes may rely on reports prepared by privately engaged experts, however the admissibility and evidentiary value of such reports would be tested during trial.A Division Bench of Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari and Justice Balaji Medamalli dismissed a civil revision petition filed by ISGEC Heavy Engineering Limited, which...
O XII R 6 CPC | No Decree On Admissions Unless Defendant's Pleadings Contain Unequivocal Admissions; J&K&L High Court
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has held that unless the admissions made by a defendant in its pleadings or otherwise are clear, categorical and unequivocal, a court cannot proceed to pass a decree under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Court further clarified that even where certain facts stand admitted, the court retains discretion to require the...
CPC Cannot Override RP Act In Election Petitions; Only Parties Specified Under Section 82 Can Be Impleaded: J&&L High Court
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has held that anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure which is contrary to the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 cannot be made applicable to the trial of election petitions.Since Section 82 of the Act of 1951 provides as to which persons are to be impleaded as respondents to an election petition, anything...
Mere Mention Of Word 'Dead' In Small Font Against Party's Name Doesn't Satisfy Duty To Inform Under Order 22 Rule 10-A CPC: J&K&L High Court
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has held that merely mentioning the word “dead” against the name of a deceased respondent in a small font, without specifying the date of death, does not amount to compliance with the obligation cast upon counsel under Rule 10-A of Order XXII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.The Court observed that such conduct reflected a...
Section 22 CPC | Mandatory To Issue Prior Notice To Opposite Party In Plea Seeking Transfer Of Suit To Different Court: MP High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed a petition seeking transfer of a civil suit from a Narsinghpur court to Jabalpur court, observing that the application was not maintainable due to non-compliance with the mandatory requirement of issuing prior notice to the opposite parties under Section 22 CPC. Section 22 CPC states that where a suit may be instituted in any one of two or more...
CPC | Defendant Cannot Retract Pleadings By Filing Additional Written Statement : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has held that a defendant cannot be permitted to radically alter her stand in a civil suit through an additional written statement after the trial has commenced, particularly when the new plea is inconsistent with the original defence. The Supreme Court has set aside a Calcutta High Court order that allowed a defendant to file an additional written statement at an advanced...
O.7 R.3 CPC | Not Mandatory To Include Defendant's Property In Schedule To Suit For Determination Of Boundary: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court recently held that it is not necessary to schedule the property of the defendant in suits for determination/fixation of boundary as per Order VII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Division Bench of Justice Satish Ninan and Justice P. Krishna Kumar clarified that the mandate is that the plaint must describe the plaintiff's property and mention that the...
S.17 CPC | Partition Suit For Properties Across Jurisdictions Can Be Filed In Any Court Where A Portion Is Situated: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has said that under Section 17 CPC if immovable properties are situated in the jurisdiction of different Courts, then a partition suit can be instituted in any of the Courts within whose jurisdiction any portion of the property or one or more properties may be situated.The Division Bench of Justice Sathish Ninan and Justice P. Krishna Kumar examined Sections 16 and 17...
Order VI Rule17 CPC | Mere Delay In Seeking Amendment Of Pleadings Not Ground To Reject It: Rajasthan High Court
The Rajasthan High Court has held that mere delay in making an amendment application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC is not enough by itself to refuse such an amendment, since the delay could be compensated in terms of money.Order 6 Rule 17 CPC authorizes the court to permit a party to alter or amend their pleadings at any stage of the proceedings. The bench of Justice Maneesh Sharma highlighted...