Code Of Civil Procedure - Study Mode

[#776] On rejection of a suit under Order VII, Rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure, a fresh suit on the same cause of action under Order VII, Rule 13 of Code of Civil Procedure
Correct Answer

(B) Is not barred at all

Explanation

Solution: Order VII, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Order VII, Rule 11 of the CPC provides the grounds for the rejection of a plaint. A court may reject a plaint if it does not disclose a cause of action, is barred by law, lacks necessary court fees, or is filed in a court without jurisdiction. This provision ensures that frivolous or legally untenable suits do not proceed to trial. Order VII, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Order VII, Rule 13 states that the rejection of a plaint under Rule 11 does not preclude the plaintiff from filing a fresh suit on the same cause of action. This means that rejection of a plaint does not operate as a bar to a new suit, provided that the defects leading to the rejection are rectified in the subsequent filing. Explanation of the Correct Answer The correct answer is Option B: Is not barred at all . Why Option B is Correct? Order VII, Rule 13 clearly states that when a plaint is rejected under Rule 11, the plaintiff is not barred from filing a fresh suit on the same cause of action. Unlike dismissal on merits, which creates a res judicata bar, rejection under Rule 11 is procedural in nature and does not prevent the plaintiff from refiling the suit with necessary corrections. Why Other Options Are Incorrect? Option A: "Is barred under all circumstances" – Incorrect, because Rule 13 explicitly permits the filing of a fresh suit after rejection. Option C: "Can be filed with the leave of the court" – Incorrect, because there is no requirement under Rule 13 to obtain permission from the court. The plaintiff can refile the suit independently. Option D: "Either B or C" – Incorrect, because only Option B is correct. There is no requirement to seek the court's leave for refiling the suit. Conclusion Since Order VII, Rule 13 explicitly allows a fresh suit after rejection under Rule 11, the correct answer is Option B: Is not barred at all .

[#777] A' granted an injunction restraining 'B' from use of a trade mark. 'A' alleged that 'B' had willfully disobeyed the injunction order. 'B' pleaded that he had no knowledge of the injunction order. Evidence was non conclusive. The Court shall order
Correct Answer

(D) None of these

Explanation

Solution: Injunction and Disobedience of Injunction Order An injunction is a court order restraining a party from doing a specific act or compelling them to perform a certain act. It is an equitable remedy granted to prevent irreparable harm. If a person willfully disobeys an injunction order, they may be held liable for contempt of court , which can lead to penalties such as attachment of property, detention in civil prison, or fines. However, if the party genuinely lacks knowledge of the order, the court must consider whether the violation was intentional. Explanation of the Correct Answer The correct answer is Option D: None of these . Why Option D is Correct? In cases of alleged disobedience of an injunction order, the burden is on the plaintiff to prove that the defendant had knowledge of the order and willfully disobeyed it. In this case, B pleaded lack of knowledge, and the evidence was inconclusive . Since contempt proceedings require clear and conclusive proof of willful disobedience, the court cannot impose penalties like property attachment, civil detention, or damages without sufficient evidence. Why Other Options Are Incorrect? Option A: "Property to 'B' to be attached" – Incorrect, because attachment of property is a severe penalty imposed only when willful disobedience is conclusively proven. Option B: "'B' to be detained in civil prison" – Incorrect, as civil detention for contempt requires clear proof that the defendant knowingly and willfully disobeyed the injunction, which is missing in this case. Option C: "'B' to compensate 'A' by damages" – Incorrect, because contempt proceedings do not automatically entitle the complainant to damages unless the violation is proved and damages are specifically sought in a separate claim. Conclusion Since there is no conclusive evidence of willful disobedience, the court cannot impose penalties. Therefore, the correct answer is Option D: None of these .

[#778] In which of the following cases cross-objections as between co-respondents can be permitted?
Correct Answer

(C) Both A and B

Explanation

Solution: Cross-Objections Between Co-Respondents Cross-objections are filed by a respondent in an appeal when they wish to challenge a part of the decision that was not in their favor. Generally, cross-objections are filed against the appellant, but in certain cases, they can also be filed against a co-respondent. According to the principles laid down by courts, cross-objections between co-respondents are permitted in two key situations: Explanation of the Correct Answer The correct answer is Option C: Both A and B . Why Option C is Correct? 1. Option A: "The appeal as regards certain parties cannot be disposed of without determining the question between co-respondents" – Cross-objections are permitted when the appeal's decision depends on an issue between co-respondents. If resolving the appeal requires addressing a dispute between co-respondents, the court allows such cross-objections. 2. Option B: "Where the objections are common as against the appellant and co-respondent" – If the objections raised by one respondent are also applicable to a co-respondent, cross-objections are permitted. This prevents unnecessary separate litigation and ensures that all related issues are addressed within the same appeal. Since both conditions justify allowing cross-objections between co-respondents, Option C (Both A and B) is the correct answer . Why Other Options Are Incorrect? Option D: "None of these" – Incorrect, because cross-objections between co-respondents are permitted under the conditions mentioned in Options A and B. Conclusion Cross-objections between co-respondents are allowed when the appeal’s resolution requires determining an issue between them or when the objections are common against both the appellant and a co-respondent. Therefore, the correct answer is Option C: Both A and B .

[#779] The property which is not liable to attachment and sale in execution of decree:
Correct Answer

(C) Books of Account

Explanation

Solution: Attachment and Sale of Property in Execution of Decree When a court passes a decree for the recovery of money, the judgment debtor’s property can be attached and sold to satisfy the decree. However, certain properties are exempt from attachment and sale under Section 60(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Explanation of the Correct Answer The correct answer is Option C: Books of Account. Why Option C is Correct? >> xa0 Books of Account are explicitly mentioned under Section 60(1) of the CPC as exempt from attachment and sale. >> xa0These books do not have an independent monetary value and merely serve as records of financial transactions. >> xa0 Courts recognize that attaching and selling books of account would not benefit the decree-holder, as they are not tangible assets that can be converted into money. Why Other Options Are Incorrect? Option A: "Government securities" – Incorrect, because government securities are valuable financial instruments that can be attached and sold in execution of a decree. Option B: "Promissory Note" – Incorrect, because a promissory note represents a legal obligation to pay money, making it an attachable asset. Option D: "Bond" – Incorrect, because bonds are financial assets that can be converted into cash, making them liable for attachment and sale. Conclusion Since Books of Account are specifically exempted under Section 60(1) of the CPC, they cannot be attached and sold in execution of a decree. Therefore, the correct answer is Option C: Books of Account.

[#780] Order 5, Rule 26 provides for summons to be served:
Correct Answer

(D) All of these

Explanation

Solution: Summons Under Order V, Rule 26 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Definition of Summons: A summons is a legal document issued by a court requiring a person to appear before it. Under Order V of the CPC, the procedure for issuing and serving summons is specified. Explanation of Order V, Rule 26: Order V, Rule 26 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, deals with the service of summons in foreign territories. It provides that summons can be served in different ways, depending on the legal arrangements in place for that foreign region. Correct Answer: Option D: All of these Why Option D is Correct? Order V, Rule 26 specifies three different ways of serving summons in foreign territories: Option A: By sending it to the political agent appointed by the Central Government in exercise of its foreign jurisdiction – When the Central Government exercises foreign jurisdiction, it may appoint a political agent to handle legal matters, including the service of summons. Option B: Through a court established or continued with power to serve a summon issued under the code – If there exists a court in the foreign territory that has been established or recognized by Indian law for this purpose, the summons can be served through that court. Option C: Through a court declared by the notification issued by the Central Government, situated in such foreign territory to be one service by which would be deemed to be valid, where there is no such court – If there is no such recognized court, then the Central Government can declare a specific court in that foreign country, whose service of summons would be considered valid in India. Since all three options correctly describe different modes of serving summons under Order V, Rule 26, the correct answer is Option D: All of these.