{"id":304719,"date":"2023-10-14T16:00:48","date_gmt":"2023-10-14T10:30:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=304719"},"modified":"2023-10-19T11:09:34","modified_gmt":"2023-10-19T05:39:34","slug":"calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Jurisdiction under Article 227 is vast, should be exercised sparingly\u2019; Calcutta High Court upholds lower court\u2019s order to condone delay"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Calcutta High Court:<\/span> While dismissing the application filed under Article 227<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>, challenging a judgment and order passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Alipore, a dingle-judge bench comprising of Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee,*<\/span> J., found no illegality, irrationality, or procedural impropriety in the lower court order’s to condone the delay and set aside the order of abatement. The Court emphasized that the rules of limitation were not meant to destroy the rights of parties and that the word “sufficient cause” under Section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction to advance substantial justice.<\/p>\n

Factual Matrix<\/p>\n

The petitioner claims that the opposite party, asserting ownership of the property in question, initiated a suit for eviction against the petitioner regarding the same property. In response, the petitioner filed a Written Statement to contest the suit. During the course of the suit, plaintiff 1-opposite party passed away. The petitioner alleged that no action was taken on behalf of plaintiff 2 to legally substitute the deceased plaintiff’s heirs within the statutory limitation period, causing the suit to abate against plaintiff 1 around 27-09-2012.<\/p>\n

It was further contended that on 08-01-2013, the legal heirs of the deceased plaintiff 1 filed an application under Order 22 Rule 9(2)<\/a> read with Section 151<\/a> of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908<\/a> and sought to set aside the abatement order regarding plaintiff 1 and substitute themselves as the legal heirs in place of the original plaintiff 1. Additionally, they applied for condonation of the delay in filing this application. The petitioner opposed these applications, asserting that there were discrepancies and deficiencies in the delay condonation application. The court below, however, granted the applications.<\/p>\n

Aggrieved by the impugned a judgment and order dated 08-08-2016 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Alipore which allowed the above-mentioned applications, the petitioner preferred an application under Article 227<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>, challenging the same.<\/p>\n

Moot Point<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n

    Whether the delay in filing the application for setting aside the abatement was intentional or due to valid reasons?<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  2. \n

    Whether the court below erred in its judgment by condoning the delay and setting aside the abatement order?<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Parties’ Contentions<\/p>\n

    The petitioner contended that there were substantial discrepancies and deficiencies in the application for condonation of delay, and the trial court erred in allowing it without a trial on evidence. It was contended that the delay should only be condoned when there is no dilatory intent, lack of good faith, deliberate inaction, or negligence on the applicant’s part. It was further argued that plaintiff 2, residing in the same house as plaintiff 1, failed to provide a valid explanation for not taking timely steps to substitute the legal heirs of the deceased plaintiff.<\/p>\n

    The opposite party contended that according to the suit’s pleadings, both plaintiff 1 and plaintiff 2 were co-owners of the property, therefore, any co-owner had the right to file a suit for eviction against the tenant. Since plaintiff 2 was alive when plaintiff 1 passed away, the right to continue the suit was not extinguished entirely. It was argued that there was a delay of only 102 days in filing the substitution application, and it was not the result of intentional negligence or lack of good faith. It was contended that plaintiff 2 consulted the advocate in June 2012, and it was only due to the bereavement period, the puja vacation, and winter vacation, that the application could not be filed earlier.<\/p>\n

    Court’s Analysis<\/p>\n

    The Court found that when plaintiff 1 passed away, plaintiff 2 was still on record, which meant the suit did not abate in its entirety. The Court noted the delay of 102 days in filing the substitution application and the condonation of delay application.<\/p>\n

    The Court cited N. Balakrishnan<\/span> v. N. Krishnamurthy<\/span>, (1998) 7 SCC 123<\/a> and Ram Nath Sao<\/span> v. Gobardhan Sao<\/span>, (2002) 3 SCC 195<\/a>, where the Supreme Court emphasized that “sufficient cause” under Section 5<\/a> of the Limitation Act, 1963<\/a> should be interpreted liberally to advance substantial justice. The Court held that the delay should not be presumed to be deliberate and that the court should show consideration to the party seeking condonation of delay.<\/p>\n

    The Court determined that the delay in this case was not intentional, and it was caused by bereavement, consultations with an advocate, and court vacations, therefore, the Court held there was “sufficient cause” that had prevented the opposite party from filing the application in time.<\/p>\n

    The Court held that since the delay and laches on the part of the opposite party were bona fide and unintentional, therefore, the court below was justified in granting the condonation of delay and setting aside the order of abatement.<\/p>\n

    The Court also emphasized that the jurisdiction under Article 227 should be exercised sparingly and only to correct errors of jurisdiction, not to overturn factual findings.<\/p>\n

    “The High Court in exercise of its power under Article 227 ordinarily shows indulgence in the order passed by the courts below only to keep such courts within the bounds of their authority, the object being to ensure that law is followed by such courts in exercising jurisdiction which is vested to them.”<\/p>\n

    Court’s Decision<\/p>\n

    The Court dismissed the present application, finding no gross injustice, illegality, or procedural impropriety in the order issued by the court below to condone the delay and set aside the order of abatement.<\/p>\n

    [Pradeep Mehta<\/span> v. Col. Biswajit Bhattacharya<\/span>, 2023 SCC OnLine Cal 3485<\/a>, order dated 12-10-2023<\/span>]<\/p>\n

    *Judgment by Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

    Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

    Mr. Debasish De and Ms. Debanjan De, Counsel for the Petitioner<\/p>\n

    Mr. Chayan Gupta and Mr. Rajarshi Ganguly, Counsel for the Opposite Party<\/p>\n

    Buy Constitution of India  HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

    \"Constitution<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    “By the Civil Procedure Code (amendment Act, 1999) the scope of Section 115 of the code has been curtailed but that does not mean that due to such curtailment, the High court’s power of superintendence under Article 227 has been expanded.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67514,"featured_media":290502,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[14471,2689,2552,4531,3686,60251,38318],"class_list":["post-304719","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-article-227","tag-Calcutta_High_Court","tag-Condonation_of_delay","tag-eviction","tag-Jurisdiction","tag-justice-ajoy-kumar-mukherjee","tag-landlord-tenant"],"yoast_head":"\nCalcutta High Court upheld lower court's order for condonation of delay | SCC Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"While upholding lower court's order for condonation of delay, Calcutta High Court held that jurisdiction under Article 227 is vast, should be exercised sparingly.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"\u2018Jurisdiction under Article 227 is vast, should be exercised sparingly\u2019; Calcutta High Court upholds lower court\u2019s order to condone delay\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"While upholding lower court's order for condonation of delay, Calcutta High Court held that jurisdiction under Article 227 is vast, should be exercised sparingly.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2023-10-14T10:30:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-10-19T05:39:34+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"\u2018Jurisdiction under Article 227 is vast, should be exercised sparingly\u2019; Calcutta High Court upholds lower court\u2019s order to condone delay\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/\",\"name\":\"Calcutta High Court upheld lower court's order for condonation of delay | SCC Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-10-14T10:30:48+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-10-19T05:39:34+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\"},\"description\":\"While upholding lower court's order for condonation of delay, Calcutta High Court held that jurisdiction under Article 227 is vast, should be exercised sparingly.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"calcutta high court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"\u2018Jurisdiction under Article 227 is vast, should be exercised sparingly\u2019; Calcutta High Court upholds lower court\u2019s order to condone delay\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\",\"name\":\"Ritu\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Ritu\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Calcutta High Court upheld lower court's order for condonation of delay | SCC Blog","description":"While upholding lower court's order for condonation of delay, Calcutta High Court held that jurisdiction under Article 227 is vast, should be exercised sparingly.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"\u2018Jurisdiction under Article 227 is vast, should be exercised sparingly\u2019; Calcutta High Court upholds lower court\u2019s order to condone delay","og_description":"While upholding lower court's order for condonation of delay, Calcutta High Court held that jurisdiction under Article 227 is vast, should be exercised sparingly.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2023-10-14T10:30:48+00:00","article_modified_time":"2023-10-19T05:39:34+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Ritu","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"\u2018Jurisdiction under Article 227 is vast, should be exercised sparingly\u2019; Calcutta High Court upholds lower court\u2019s order to condone delay","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Ritu","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/","name":"Calcutta High Court upheld lower court's order for condonation of delay | SCC Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","datePublished":"2023-10-14T10:30:48+00:00","dateModified":"2023-10-19T05:39:34+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9"},"description":"While upholding lower court's order for condonation of delay, Calcutta High Court held that jurisdiction under Article 227 is vast, should be exercised sparingly.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"calcutta high court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/calcutta-high-court-upheld-lower-courts-order-for-condonation-of-delay-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"\u2018Jurisdiction under Article 227 is vast, should be exercised sparingly\u2019; Calcutta High Court upholds lower court\u2019s order to condone delay"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9","name":"Ritu","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Ritu"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":311423,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/15\/calcutta-high-court-upholds-presidency-small-cause-courts-jurisdiction-under-w-b-premises-tenancy-act-1997-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":304719,"position":0},"title":"Calcutta High Court upholds Presidency Small Cause Court\u2019s jurisdiction to decide ejectment suit under W.B. Premises Tenancy Act, 1997","author":"Ritu","date":"January 15, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Calcutta High Court upheld legislative competence to confer jurisdiction on Presidency Small Cause Court, considering the specific language of Section 12A excluding jurisdiction of any other court.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":315631,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/29\/calcutta-high-court-upholds-rejection-of-order-vii-rule-11-cpc-application-scc-times-legal-news-research\/","url_meta":{"origin":304719,"position":1},"title":"Calcutta High Court upholds rejection of Order VII Rule 11 CPC application despite disclosure of Cause of Action through \u2018clever drafting\u2019","author":"Ritu","date":"February 29, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court stated that \u201cOrder VII, Rule 11 is applicable to the plaint which does not disclose cause of action and not the cases where the plea is non-existence of cause of action.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Calcutta High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":302820,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/03\/evaluation-of-suits-legality-in-application-under-order-7-rule-11d-of-cpc-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":304719,"position":2},"title":"How to evaluate a suit\u2019s legality in application under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of CPC? Calcutta High Court answers","author":"Ritu","date":"October 3, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"When evaluating an application under Order VII Rule 11(d), the court should determine whether the suit is barred by law based on the allegations in the plaint taken as true.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":313276,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/06\/calcutta-high-court-upholds-amendment-to-written-statement-under-order-vi-rule-17-cpc-for-effective-adjudication-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":304719,"position":3},"title":"Calcutta High Court upholds amendment to written statement under Order VI Rule 17 CPC, emphasising necessity for effective adjudication","author":"Ritu","date":"February 6, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Calcutta High Court noted that the amendment did not change the suit's nature fundamentally and would not cause undue prejudice to the petitioner.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":314401,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/16\/cal-hc-affirms-rejection-of-extension-application-for-arrear-rent-deposit-under-section-7-of-wb-bengal-premises-tenancy-act-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":304719,"position":4},"title":"Calcutta High Court affirms rejection of extension application for arrear rent deposit under Section 7(1)(c) of W.B. Bengal Premises Tenancy Act","author":"Ritu","date":"February 16, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court held that the court\u2019s jurisdiction is limited in extending time for depositing rent, and it cannot go beyond the provisions of the law.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":310485,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/01\/calcutta-high-court-upholds-forfeiture-of-earnest-money-in-e-auction-sale-dispute-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":304719,"position":5},"title":"Calcutta High Court upholds forfeiture of earnest money in e-auction sale dispute","author":"Ritu","date":"January 1, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Calcutta High Court stated that the terms of the e-auction notice explicitly stated the conditions of the sale, including the forfeiture clause in case of non-compliance by the bidder.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/304719","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67514"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=304719"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/304719\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/290502"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=304719"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=304719"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=304719"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}