Get Advice on Live Video Call
Earn $ Cash $ with
consultations on Bissoy App

Against a decree passed in a suit after recording a compromise an appeal on the ground that the compromise should not have been recorded, can be filed under:

Correct Answer: Order XLIII, Rule 1A Code of Civil Procedure

To constitute a matter of res judicata which of the following conditions must concur?
1. The matter directly and substantially in issue in the subsequent suit or issue must be the same matter which was directly and substantially in issue either actually (section 11, explanation III) or constructively (section 11, explanation IV) in the former suit
2. The former suit must have been a suit between the same parties under whom they or any of them claim. Explanation VI of Section 11 must be read with this condition
3. The parties as aforesaid must have litigated under the same title in the former suit
4. The court which decided the former suit must have been a court competent to try the subsequent suit of the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised. Explanation II of section 11 is to be read with condition
5. The matter directly and substantially in issue in the subsequent suit must have been heard and finally decided by the court in the first suit. Explanation V of section 11 is to be read with this condition

In a suit for partition, a Memorandum of Family Settlement is filed and on this basis the partition suit is decreed, but even after disposal of the suit the original Memorandum of Family Settlement remains in the file of the partition suit, then in such situation whether in a suit for eviction by one of the original co-owner of a tenant of a shop of the joint property which has fallen to the share of that co-owner as per the decree passed on the Memorandum of Family Settlement, can the certified copy of the Memorandum of Family Settlement be filed and proved as a public document in the suit against the tenant?

X sues A and B on a promissory note executed by A, B is A's nephew, and he is joined as a defendant on the ground that A and B are member of a joint Hindu family, and that the note was for a debt binding on the family. None of the defendant appears at the hearing and an ex parte decree is passed against both the defendants.
The decree against A proceeds on the ground that the note was passed by him and against B on the ground that the debt was incurred for a family purpose. B applies for an order to set aside the decree, alleging that the summons was not served upon him and that the debt in respect of which the note was passed by A was not incurred for a family purpose. It is not disputed that the amount was actually advanced to A.

In a suit filed by the plaintiff, the defendant in his written statement has taken the objection of non-impleadment of necessary party. Despite such objection the plaintiff continued the suit and the suit finally was decreed. At the first appellate stage, the plaintiff withdraws the suit with liberty to file a fresh one on the same cause of action and subsequently filed a fresh suit. The period spent by the plaintiff in the earlier suit, under section 14 of Limitation Act is

Rule: Courts are under an obligation to inform the parties where an appeal lies. A lower court judge pronounced a judgment after hearing lengthy arguments from plaintiff's and defendant's advocates. He did not inform the parties about the period of limitation for filing an appeal under latest amendment. The plaintiff failed to appeal on time and requested the higher court for condonation of delay on the ground that the lower court judge failed to fulfil his obligation as he was not informed about the appeal. Will the higher court consider this ground as sufficient cause for condonation of delay?

Existence of two suits, by parties litigating under same title, one previously instituted which is pending at present and the other filed later, wherein a matter in issue in the subsequently filed suit is directly and substantially in issue in the other and the relief claimed in the subsequent suit can effectively, be passed by the court of previous instance. Which section of Code of Civil Procedure decides the fate of the subsequently filed suit and its proceeding?

A filed a suit for partition and that ended in a final decree. Then A filed a second suit against the defendant claiming mesne profits in respect of excess lands which had been in his possession for a period prior to the passing of the final decree.

Which of the following statement is correct?
1. An appeal may lie from an original decree passed ex parte
2. No appeal shall lie from a decree passed by the Court with the consent of parties
3. No appeal shall lie on a question of law

Consider the following propositions:
1. A void marriage remains valid until a decree annulling it has been passed by a competent court.
2. A void marriage is never a valid marriage and there is no necessity of any decree annulling it.
3. A voidable marriage remains valid until a decree annulling it has been passed by a competent court.
4. Children born out of void marriage will get legal protection under section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on the basis of decree of nullity of such marriage.
Choose the correct option from below:

Which of the following statements is/are correct?
1. Appeals under Section 57 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, can be filed only before the Appellate Tribunal
2. Appeals under Section 57 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, can be filed only before the Cyber Appellate Tribunal
3. The appeal under the Information Technology Act, 20000, can be filed before the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal established under the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997
Select the correct answer using the given below: