Landmark Judgments of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
The 29 leading Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 cases — each with a full brief (facts, issues, held, ratio). Verified against the original judgment. Free to read.
Institution of suits, parties, frame of suit, pleadings (O1–O8)
- Kedar Lall Seal v Hari Lall Seal A claim should not be thrown out on a mere technicality of pleading where the substance is present and no prejudice is caused to the other side.
- Ram Sarup Gupta (Dead) by LRs v Bishun Narain Inter College Pleadings must receive a liberal construction; where parties go to trial and lead evidence on a point, absence of an express pleading cannot be raised in appeal.
- Kasturi v Iyyamperumal Strangers claiming independent title and possession are neither necessary nor proper parties in a suit for specific performance and cannot be impleaded under Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC.
Jurisdiction and place of suing (S15-25); effect of objections to valuation
Summons, discovery, issues & trial; dismissal & restoration (O9-O18)
- Sangram Singh v Election Tribunal, Kotah An 'ex parte' order under Order 9 merely lets the court proceed in the defendant's absence; the defendant may appear and join the proceedings at any adjourned hearing.
- Arjun Singh v Mohindra Kumar An interlocutory order refusing relief under Order IX Rule 7, passed without competence, is not res judicata barring a later Order IX Rule 13 application.
- Salem Advocate Bar Association, Tamil Nadu v Union of India The CPC amendments of 1999 and 2002 are constitutionally valid; their time limits are directory, not mandatory, and courts retain inherent power to extend them in exceptional cases.
Suits in special cases & summary suits (O1 R8, interpleader, O37)
- Santosh Kumar v Bhai Mool Singh Under Order XXXVII, where the defence raises a real triable issue that would, if proved, succeed, leave to defend must be granted unconditionally.
- Mechelec Engineers & Manufacturers v Basic Equipment Corporation A defendant raising a triable issue or bona fide defence in a summary suit is entitled to unconditional leave to defend; a High Court cannot upset that discretionary order under Section 115 CPC unless the defence is patently dishonest or wholly unreasonable.
Inherent powers (S33-35, 151) - scope and limits
Interim relief — injunctions, receivers, attachment, arrest (O38–O40, O39)
- Manohar Lal Chopra v Rai Bahadur Rao Raja Seth Hiralal Civil courts have inherent power under Section 151 CPC to grant temporary injunctions in cases not covered by Order 39, but not in conflict with express provisions of the Code.
- Dalpat Kumar v Prahlad Singh A temporary injunction may be granted only where the applicant establishes a prima facie case, irreparable injury and balance of convenience in its favour.
- Gujarat Bottling Co Ltd v Coca Cola Co Interim injunction enforcing a negative covenant operating during the contract's subsistence was upheld; such a covenant is not a restraint of trade under Section 27.
- Raman Tech & Process Engg Co v Solanki Traders Attachment before judgment is a drastic power requiring both a prima facie case and proof the defendant is removing assets to defeat the decree.
Appeals, reference, review & revision (S96-115)
Frame of suit; bar against splitting claims and reliefs under Order 2 Rule 2 CPC
Jurisdiction, res judicata & res sub judice (S9–14, 21)
- Sheodan Singh v Smt. Daryao Kunwar An appeal dismissed on a preliminary ground (limitation or default in printing) that confirms the trial court's decision on merits operates as res judicata.
- Dhulabhai v State of Madhya Pradesh Civil courts' jurisdiction is not readily ousted; a suit lies to challenge a tax levied under an ultra vires provision or where the Act gives no refund remedy.
- Smt. Satya v Teja Singh A foreign divorce decree obtained by fraudulently founding jurisdiction on a sham domicile is not pronounced by a court of competent jurisdiction and is not conclusive under Section 13 CPC.
- State of Uttar Pradesh v Nawab Hussain The principle of constructive res judicata applies to writ petitions; a plea available but not raised in an earlier writ cannot be raised in a later suit.
Appeals, reference, review & revision (S96–115)
- Shankar Ramchandra Abhyankar v Krishnaji Dattatreya Bapat Where a party has invoked and exhausted the High Court's revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 CPC, it cannot thereafter challenge the same order by writ under Articles 226/227.
- Lily Thomas v Union of India A review under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC / Article 137 lies only for an error apparent on the face of the record; the mere possibility of two views is no ground for review.
- Surya Dev Rai v Ram Chander Rai Curtailment of revision under amended Section 115 CPC does not affect the High Court's power under Articles 226 and 227 to correct subordinate courts' jurisdictional errors.
Jurisdiction, res judicata & res sub judice (S9-14, 21)
Execution of decrees (S36–74, O21)
- Bhavan Vaja v Solanki Hanuji Khodaji Mansang An executing court cannot go behind the decree, but must construe it in light of the pleadings and proceedings leading up to it to find its true effect.
- Padanathil Rugmini Amma v P K Abdulla An assignee from a decree-holder auction-purchaser stands in no better position than the decree-holder and must restore the property on restitution when the decree is set aside.
- Silverline Forum Pvt Ltd v Rajiv Trust Resistance to a possession decree by any person, including a stranger, must be adjudicated by the executing court under Order 21 Rule 97; no separate suit is needed.
