MADHOSINGH Vs. JAITPALSINGH
LAWS(RAJ)-1952-5-30
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on May 05,1952

MADHOSINGH Appellant
VERSUS
JAITPALSINGH Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

KALIANDAS BALCHAND V. MUHAMMAD AKBAR FATEHALI [REFERRED TO]
SADAYATAN PANDE VS. (FIRM) RAM CHANDRA GOPAL [REFERRED TO]
YALPI VIRUPAKSHAPPA VS. CHOWDIREDDI VEERABHADRA GOWD [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

SAJJANAM WADLA CHINA RAJAYYA VS. CHAPPAL VENKATESHWAR RAO [LAWS(APH)-1958-3-8] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Wanchoo, C.J. - (1.)This is a second appeal by Madhosingh and Jatendrasingh against the order of the Civil and Additional Sessions Judge, Balotra, and has arisen, in the following circumstances.
(2.)A suit was filed by the appellants for Rs. 3,100/- on 23-7-1946, in the court of the Judicial Superintendent, Malanee. The suit included two distinct claims based on two separate causes of action. There was an objection as to multifarious-ness. Thereupon the court ordered in May 1947 that the plaint should be amended, and allowed 14 days' time to do so.
(3.)In July 1947, the appellants filed two drafts of two plaints--one for Rs. 2,000/and odd, and the other for Rs. 800/- and odd, separating the claims arising out of the two causes of action. The court again ordered the appellants to choose as to which case they wanted to remain in that court, and which they wanted to withdraw. The appellants applied on the 18-11-1947, that they wanted to keep the suit for Rs. 2000/- and odd in that court, and wanted to withdraw the suit for Rs. 800/- and odd with permission to bring a fresh suit. Thereupon, on 26-11-1947, the appellants were allowed to withdraw their claim with respect to Rs. 800/- and odd with permission to bring a fresh suit in that connection. They then filed a fresh suit for Rs. 800/- and odd in the court of the Hakim in December, 1947. In that case an objection was taken that the suit was time-barred. The appellants prayed for the benefit of Section 14, Limitation Act. The courts below have, however, held that the benefit of Section 14 cannot be granted to the appellants in view of the provisions of Order 23, Rule 2, Civil P. C. Hence this second appeal.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.