Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library

Report No. 144

6.1.7. Recommendation.-

It appears to us that the reasoning advanced in the Madras case1 of 1915 is unanswerable. The need is to codify that interpretation by suitably amending the law. An explanation could be added to Order 2, rule 2 for the purpose.

1. Ibid.

6.2. Order 2, rule 2 and Suits filed simultaneously

6.2.1. A controversy which has arisen out of Order 2, rule 2(2), is concerned with the prohibition indicated by the words "lie shall not afterwards sue in respect of the portion so omitted or relinquished".

Conflicting Judicial Decisions pertaining to the Code of Civil Procedure Back

Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys