Return of a Plaint under Civil Procedure Code
Return of a plaint is quite different from rejection of a plaint by a civil court. The Order 7 Rules 10 and 10B speak about return of plaint.
Rejection of a Plaint under 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.
Substantial Question of Law & Second Appeal
A second appeal lies to the High Court (HC) from every decree passed in appeal by any subordinate court if the HC is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law. If satisfied the HC shall formulate that question. The Memorandum of Appeal shall state the substantial question of law proposed.
Legality of a Person’s Will in regard to his Dead Body
Dead men are no longer persons in the eye of the law. They are devoid of much rights and no sort of liabilities. They no longer remain as the owners of their property even till their successors enter upon to take care of their inheritance.
They have inheritable and uninheritable rights. Personal rights are uninheritable and they are wholly extinguished by his death. Proprietary rights on the other hand are usually inheritable. The successors step in as owners of his property at the moment he dies.
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.
Trust in India : Its legal Framework
Trust is the asset or property entrusted by the Settler (the author of the trust) to the Trustees who manages it for the benefit of the beneficiaries of the Trust. In other words, the Settler entrusts the property to the Trustees for the beneficiaries in a Trust.
Kerala Headload Workers Act not applicable to Domestic Purposes
The Kerala Headload Workers Act is not applicable to engagement of a person by an individual for domestic purposes.
It is applicable to engagement or employment of persons directly or through a contractor in or for an establishment, whether for wages or not, for loading or unloading or carrying on head or person or in a trolly any article or articles in or from or to a vehicle or any place in such establishment, and includes any person not employed by any employer or contractor but engaged in the loading or unloading or carrying on head or person or in a trolly any article or articles for wages.
Attestation unnecessary for many 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.
Consumer Court can Accept WS only within 45 Days
The Supreme Court (SC) in M/S Daddys Builders Pvt. Ltd. v Manisha Bhargava holds that the District Forum has no power to extend the time to file the response to the complaint beyond the period of 15 days in addition to 30 days as is envisaged under Section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
No fresh Suit can be filed to Challenge a Consent Decree
No fresh or separate suit can be filed to set aside a decree, which was passed by a court on compromise between the parties of a suit, on the ground that the compromise was not based on free consent or lawful. The only remedy available to the party is to approach the court which recorded the compromise.