KUM GEETHA, D/O LATE KRISHNA & ORS. vs. NANJUNDASWAMY & ORS.

KUM GEETHA, D/O LATE KRISHNA & ORS. vs. NANJUNDASWAMY & ORS.

Supreme court succinctly undo the order of the high court which allowed the application under order 7 rule11 and restore the suit with respect to the property mentioned in schedule A. Apex court inferred that the High court has prejudicially applied the principle of the application for rejection of plaint under order 7 rule 11. High court can not get into merits of the case in a revision petition where court is considering an application for the rejection of plaint which was dismissed by the trial court.

RUPA ASHOK HURRA vs. ASHOK HURRA

rupa ashok hurra vs. ashok hurra

Whether an aggrieved person is entitled to any relief under article 32 against the final judgment of the apex court after dismissal of review petition?

whether an order passed by this Court can be corrected under its inherent powers after dismissal of the review petition on the ground that it was passed either without jurisdiction or in violation of the principles of natural justice or due to unfair procedure giving scope for bias which resulted in abuse of the process of the court or miscarriage of justice to an aggrieved person.

BOOZ ALLEN & HAMILTON INC. vs. SBI HOME FINANCE Ltd. & ORS.(scope of arbitration agreement, reference under section 8, first statement, arbitrability of dispute.)

order 7 rule 11

Whether subject matter of the suit was within the scope of the arbitration agreement?

Whether appellant had filed first statement before filing of application under section 8 of the Act?

Whether application filed under section 8 should be dismissed as the same was filed 20 months after entering into suit?

Whether the subject matter of dispute is arbitrable?

error: Content is protected !!