Rejection of Plaint under O 7 Rule 1 of the CPC

The object of rejection of plaint is to weed out frivolous, vexatious and improper plaints at the very outset. Institution of a suit is by presentation of plaint in the manner prescribed by law in Order 6 and 7 of the Civil Procedures Code (CPC). A plaint shall not be duly instituted unless it complies with the requirements specified in Order 4 of the CPC. The court shall ensure entering the particulars of every suit in a register of civil suits and number them in every year in a serial order as the plaints are admitted.

Attestation Mandatorily Required Only in Three Legal Instruments

Every instrument under the law in India does not require attestation. Even if it is attested the court may not be conducting the examination of them unless the document is required to be attested as per law. However, attestation of the instrument and consequent examination of the attesting witnesses as part of proving it are essential requirements in instrument such as a Will when law prescribes so.

Law on Co-owner selling his Undivided Share

A co-owner in a joint property can sell his undivided share of property to anyone. But he cannot sell the specific piece of land with marked boundaries from the joint property. A selling of a share of property by co-owner in essence means the buyer steps into the shoes of his seller. The buyer is clothed with all the rights and liabilities of his transferor. So, the buyer becomes as much a co-owner as his transferor was before the property transfer.

Suit against Public Nuisance u/s 91 CPC

When a public nuisance or other wrongful act affecting or likely to affect the public occurs, two or more persons or the Advocate General can file a suit for a declaration and injunction or for such other appropriate relief in a civil court, after obtaining leave of the court, under Section 91 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC).

Termination for hiding facts during Selection

In  Avtar Singh v Union of India & Ors delivered on 21 July, 2016, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court (SC) considered various decisions on the question of suppression of information or submitting false information in the verification form as to the question of having been criminally prosecuted, arrested or as to pendency of a criminal case. In the judgement the SC resolved the conflict of opinion in the various earlier decisions of its Division Benches and arrived at some guidelines in deciding such issues.