The powers of the Court under this Rule 17 are discretionary and very wide. The execution is commenced on an application filed under Order 21 Rule 11 C. For example, for grant of temporary injunction, the three ingredients are prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss. This rule reads as infra: 53. Civil Rules of Practice and Circular Orders,1980.
Hi, I am a recent law graduate Aug 2018. In respect of this incident, the Assistant Collector of Customs filed two separate complaints on 26-11-1973 against the appellant in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Anjar, being criminal cases Nos. The goal of the legislature and additionally the judiciary has been to grant Interlocutory applications that try to meet the finishes of equity and help in circumstances where the Original Petition is not adequate to direct the quick circumstances. The Magistrate ordered the examination of the officer under Section 540 of the Code rejecting the objections raised by the appellant. Before passing an order of attachment before judgment, the Court must be satisfied on the compliance ofO.
It is this order, which has fallen for consideration before us in these appeals. Documents marked by plaintiffs side are called Ex A 1, Ex A 2 etc. The rule holds good with reference to any application disposed of ex- parte whether without notice or whether notice is given to the opposite side and the opposite side remained ex parte. State of West Bengal — 1966 1 S. It is only when the Court decides to record oral evidence instead of deciding the matter on affidavits, that the procedure for marking documents, as in the case of recording of the evidence in the suit, needs to be followed. Neeti Ramulu and others supra , but has not taken into account the effect of Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act and in Ali Bin Aifans case supra also the learned Judge has not considered Section 3 of the Evidence Act, as such, in my opinion, the decisions rendered in Gampa Sai Ravi Kiran v. This order was set aside on the ground that the provision of Order 38 Rule 5 had not been complied with as notice was not issued in the proper form.
You may , discuss the issue on the , or , as appropriate. In United Bank of India v. Neeti Ramulu and others supra , but has not considered the effect of the same and also has not considered the effect of Section 3 of Evidence Act. I hope this is a better answer than the one before it :. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the 4th defendant in the main suit and defendants 1 and 3 in the main suit filed a petition in I. In accordance with Order 19, Rule 1, of the Civil Procedure Code, the Court has, for sufficient reasons, to pass an order that any particular fact or facts may be proved by affidavit.
In the case of Premraj Mundra vs Md. It is not uncommon for asking for and obtaining temporary injunction against a person who is not a party to the suit, also where the situation so demands. Similarly, in a winding up petition, claims are adjudicated on the basis of the affidavits by the Company Court. In all cases, the burden is not necessarily on the plaintiff. As are exhibited only tentatively for the specific purpose of the specific I. Application for such orders to be after notice. N, the matter concerned of child custody of jurisdiction of the domestic court or foreign court especially at the interim stage held that violation of an interim or an interlocutory order passed by a court of competent jurisdiction have to be viewed strictly if the rule of law has to be maintained.
Whether the objection fall under Section 47 or Order 21 Rule 90 the same have to be construed by the court depending upon the objection taken. The power of the Court under Section 540 can be exercised as much in regard to cases governed by Section 207A as in regard to other proceedings governed by the other relevant provisions of the Code. Any such application shall be heard and disposed of by the court as expeditiously as possible and shall not in any y case be adjourned to the hearing of the suit. An attachment after decree is an attachment made for the immediate purpose of arraying the decree into execution, and if presupposes an applaication on the part of the decree holder to have his decree executed. The fervent plea of the appellant is though the prosecution was instituted under the old Code he should not be denied the benefit and advantage of Section 397 2 and 3 of the new Code.
Recently the Apex Court had an occasion to deal with imposition of costs in vexatious, frivolous, malicious or speculative litigation. Judicial economy then dictates that the court resolve the issue rather than subject the parties to a trial that may be reversed on an appeal from a final judgment. However, interlocutory orders passed in the incidental proceedings have a direct bearing on the result of the original petition and such orders may be issued in a divorce proceeding where the interlocutory application is for maintenance, pending a decision on alimony and child support. Again, I'm not really sure what you are asking. Ganu Singh Vs Jangi Lal, 26 C 531.
Secondly, what was not realized was that the order passed by the Trial Court refusing to call the documents and rejecting the application under Section 311 Cr. This is relevant because after the decree the executing court cannot decide matters which have became final and which ought to have raised in the suit. Order 39 is a provision put to use day in and day out in every civil court, whether it is trial court or appellate court. Dismissal of a Suit finally terminates the proceedings therein before the Court in which the same was filed. Before adverting to the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellant, we would examine in general the scope and intent of Section 540 of the old Code corresponding to Section 311 of the new Code.
Where the subject-matter of the suit is money or some other thing capable of delivery, and any party thereto admits that he holds such money or thing as a trustee for another party or that it belongs or is due to another party, the court may order the same to be deposited in court, or delivered to such last named party. But it is left either for the prosecution or for the defence to establish its respective case by adducing the best available evidence and the Court is not empowered under the provisions of the Code to compel either the prosecution or the defence to examine any particular witness or witnesses on their sides. Interlocutory Petitions are a form of incidental proceedings and they are in aid to the final proceedings. Satyawati Tondon, it was held that normally the Supreme Court does not have the power to interfere with the discretion exercised by the high court to grant the interim order in a pending matter but it is proper to make an exceptions in the cases where the order is under challenge and has the effect of defeating the very object of the legislation enacted by Parliament. The Court below also relied on the judgment reported in the case of Smt. Generally an order appointing Receiver will not be made where it would have the effect of depriving the defendant of the defacto possession.