Transfer of Cases under CPC (Sections 22–25) Introduction As a general rule, in civil litigation the plaintiff is dominus litis (master of the suit) and enjoys the right to choose the forum where the suit will be instituted, provided that multiple courts have jurisdiction. Normally, this choice is respected and not interfered with. However, to balance fairness, the CPC (Sections 22–25) empowers defendants, High Courts, and the Supreme Court to transfer cases in appropriate circumstances. These provisions are exhaustive and act as safeguards to ensure fair trial, convenience, and justice. Section 22 & 23: Transfer on Defendant’s Application Who Can Apply? • Only the defendant (not the plaintiff). When Can Defendant Apply? • Where the plaintiff had a choice of filing in two or more courts, but chose one. • The defendant may seek transfer to another competent court. Conditions: 1. Defendant must give notice to plaintiff and other parties (mandatory). 2. Application must be filed at the earliest stage, before settlement of issues. 3. The court must hear objections before deciding. Where to File Transfer Application? (Sec. 23) 1. If both courts are subordinate to the same appellate court → Application lies to that Appellate Court (District Judge). 2. If courts are under different appellate courts but same High Court → Application lies to the High Court. 3. If courts are under different High Courts (different States) → Application lies to the High Court within whose jurisdiction the suit was filed. Section 24: General Power of High Court & District Court Who Can Apply? • Any party (plaintiff/defendant), OR • The Court suo motu (on its own). When? • At any stage of the case. Powers of High Court/District Court under Section 24: 1. Transfer a case from one subordinate court to another. 2. Withdraw a case from a subordinate court and: • Try it themselves, or • Send it to another subordinate court, or • Re-transfer to the original court. Scope of Section 24: • Applies to any suit, appeal, or proceeding, including execution cases. • Can transfer cases even from a court without jurisdiction. • If a Small Causes Court case is transferred, the transferee court will act as a Small Causes Court. Case Law: • Durgesh Sharma v. Jayshree (2008 SC) → High Court cannot transfer a case to a court not subordinate to it. Section 25: Power of Supreme Court to Transfer Who Can Apply? • Any party to the case. Scope: • Supreme Court can transfer any suit, appeal, or proceeding from one High Court/civil court in one State to another High Court/civil court in another State. • Grounds: Expedient in the interest of justice (fair trial, convenience, avoiding conflicting judgments). Process: • Formal application + supporting affidavit must be filed before the Supreme Court. Effect of Transfer: • The new court may: 1. Start the case afresh, or 2. Continue from the stage left by previous court (as directed by SC). Case Law: • Shakuntala Modi v. Om Prakash Bharoka (1991 SC) → Husband filed divorce in Bombay, wife filed maintenance in Guwahati. SC transferred the divorce case to Guwahati for convenience and to avoid conflicting decisions. Judicial Principles on Transfer of Cases Balancing Interests: 1. Plaintiff’s Right → To choose the forum. 2. Defendant’s Right → To fair and impartial trial. Courts must carefully balance both and transfer cases only when truly necessary. Key Supreme Court Observations & Case Laws 1. Arvee Industries v. Ratan Lal (1977 SC) • Plaintiff’s choice should not be disturbed lightly. • Burden of proof lies on party seeking transfer. 2. Maneka Gandhi v. Rani Jethmalani (1979 SC) • Famous principle: “Fair trial is the paramount consideration.” • Transfer only when justice is genuinely threatened (bias, safety threats, public hostility). 3. T.V. Eachara Warrier v. State of Kerala (1985) • Mere inconvenience, vague allegations, or delay in filing transfer → Not enough. 4. Indian Overseas Bank v. Chemical Construction Co. (1979 SC) • Court considers balance of convenience (for parties, witnesses, and smooth trial). • “Forum conveniens” principle applied. 5. Subramaniam Swamy v. Ramakrishna Hegde (1990 SC) • Even if the transferee court lacks territorial jurisdiction, case can be transferred if justice requires. 6. Kulwinder Kaur v. Kandi Friends Education Trust (2008 SC) • Court must avoid discussing merits while transferring. • Reasons must be recorded. ✓ Grounds for Transfer of Suits Sufficient Grounds 1. To avoid multiplicity of proceedings/conflicting judgments (Indian Overseas Bank case). 2. Reasonable apprehension of bias or unfair trial (Gujarat Electricity Board v. Atmaram Poshani, 1989). 3. Common questions of law/fact in related suits. 4. Balance of convenience for parties/witnesses (Arvee Industries). 5. To avoid delay/unnecessary expenses (Shiv Kumari v. Ramajor Shitla Prasad, 1997). 6. To prevent abuse of court process (Maneka Gandhi case). 7. Cases involving important questions of law/public interest. Insufficient Grounds 1. Mere personal inconvenience (Indian Overseas Bank). 2. Vague fear of unfair trial without evidence (Maneka Gandhi). 3. Long distance of court (Manohar Lal v. Seth Hiralal, 1962). 4. Opponent being influential (Subramaniam Swamy case). 5. Presiding judge’s community/religion (Gaja Dhar Prasad v. Sohan Lal). 6. Judge’s past decision in similar case (Krishan Kanahya v. Vijay Kumar). 7. Adverse remarks by judge or prejudice against pleader (not affecting party). Landmark Case: Gujarat Electricity Board v. Atmaram Sungomal Poshani (1989 SC) Facts: • Employee (Atmaram) filed a suit in Bombay against disciplinary proceedings by Gujarat Electricity Board. • Cause of action arose in Gujarat. Issue: • Could Bombay court hear the case? Was there valid apprehension of bias in Gujarat? Decision: • SC transferred case to Gujarat. Principles Laid Down: 1. “Justice must not only be done but must also seem to be done.” 2. Balance of convenience favoured Gujarat (place of cause of action). 3. Mere allegation of bias not enough. Conclusion Sections 22–25 CPC ensure that transfer of cases is possible only when necessary for justice, while protecting the plaintiff’s dominus litis right. Courts exercise this power cautiously, balancing plaintiff’s forum choice and defendant’s fair trial right….
Author: toahostinger
Place of Suing under CPC (Sections 15–21A) Introduction Jurisdiction refers to the power of a court to hear and decide a case and to pass a decree. Before filing a suit, one of the most important considerations is the place of suing, i.e., the venue where the trial will be conducted. The Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) deals with the place of suing under Sections 15–21A, covering aspects such as territorial, pecuniary, and subject-matter jurisdiction. A decree passed by a court lacking jurisdiction is considered a nullity. However, there is a difference between errors relating to territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction and subject-matter jurisdiction. While errors in the former make the decision irregular, errors in the latter render the decree void. Types of Jurisdiction 1. Territorial (Local) Jurisdiction • Every court has geographical limits within which it can exercise authority. • It cannot pass orders outside its local jurisdiction. 2. Pecuniary Jurisdiction • Courts are restricted by the monetary value of the suits they can hear. • Example: A court with pecuniary jurisdiction up to ₹20,000 cannot entertain a suit valued beyond that. 3. Subject-Matter Jurisdiction • Certain courts are restricted from entertaining certain types of cases. • Example: Presidency Small Causes Courts cannot try suits for partition, redemption of mortgage, or specific performance. • Any decree passed without subject-matter jurisdiction is null and void. Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses Parties may agree that in case of disputes, a particular court shall have exclusive jurisdiction. However, as held in Hakam Singh v. Gammon (India) Ltd. (1971 SC), parties cannot confer jurisdiction upon a court which otherwise has none under the CPC. But where multiple courts have jurisdiction, parties may choose one. Such clauses are not invalid under Sections 23 and 28 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Important Provisions (Sections 15–21A CPC) Section 15 – Court in which suits to be instituted • Every suit must be filed in the lowest grade competent court. • Jurisdiction is determined by the plaintiff’s valuation of the suit. • Later increase/decrease in value does not affect jurisdiction. Case Law: Harshad Chiman Lal v. DLF Universal Ltd. (2005) – A decree passed by a court without jurisdiction is null and void. Section 16 – Suits to be instituted where subject-matter situate • Applies to suits relating to immovable property: • Recovery of property • Partition • Mortgage suits • Determination of rights • Wrong to immovable property • Such suits must be filed where the property is located. Proviso: If relief can be obtained by personal obedience of defendant, the suit may also be filed where the defendant resides or works. Section 17 – Immovable property within jurisdiction of different courts • If property is situated in areas falling under multiple courts, the suit may be filed in any one of the courts, provided the entire claim is cognizable by it. • Objective: Prevents multiplicity of suits. Section 18 – Where jurisdiction of courts is uncertain • If it is uncertain in which court’s jurisdiction the property falls, any of the courts may entertain the suit after recording a statement of uncertainty. • Objections cannot be raised later unless there has been failure of justice. Section 19 – Suits for compensation for wrongs to person or movables • Plaintiff has an option to file a suit either: • Where the wrong was committed, or • Where the defendant resides/works for gain. Example: A residing in Delhi beats B in Calcutta → B can sue either in Calcutta or Delhi. Section 20 – Other suits where defendants reside or cause of action arises • Subject to above provisions, suits can be filed where: (a) Defendant resides/carries on business/works for gain. (b) Any one of multiple defendants resides, provided leave of court or acquiescence by others. (c) Cause of action arises, wholly or partly. Explanation: • A corporation is deemed to carry on business at its principal office or at a subordinate office where cause of action arises. Case Law: South East Asia Shipping Co. Ltd. v. Nav Bharat Enterprises (1996) – Cause of action means the bundle of facts necessary to prove a claim. Section 21 – Objections to jurisdiction • Objections as to jurisdiction (territorial/pecuniary/place of suing) must satisfy three conditions: 1. Taken in the trial court. 2. Raised at the earliest opportunity. 3. There has been failure of justice. Case Law: Pathumma v. Kuntalan Kutty (1981) – All three conditions must co-exist. Section 21A – Bar on suit to set aside decree on objection as to place of suing • No fresh suit can be filed challenging a decree merely on the ground that the suit was filed in the wrong place. • Example: If Court A passes a decree, the defendant cannot later challenge it saying Court B was the proper place. Illustrations (Practical Examples) • Defamation: A resides in Delhi, defamatory statements published in Calcutta → Suit can be filed in Delhi or Calcutta. • Immovable Property: Property in Chandigarh but defendant resides in Delhi → Suit can be filed in Chandigarh or Delhi (if relief is possible by defendant’s personal obedience). • Contract: Contract made in Delhi, performance in Bombay, payment in Calcutta → Suit can be filed in Delhi, Bombay, or Calcutta. Conclusion The provisions of Sections 15–21A CPC ensure a fair, convenient, and just system for determining the place of suing. They prevent forum shopping, ensure that suits are tried in competent courts, and balance the interests of both plaintiffs and defendants. Errors regarding territorial or pecuniary jurisdiction are treated as irregularities, while absence of subject-matter jurisdiction renders a decree void. Thus, these provisions act as safeguards against misuse of jurisdiction and promote judicial efficiency. ✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324 At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need: •Subject-wise expert classes •Mock test series •Legal current affairs •Personalized mentorship for interview preparation “Your law degree is your foundation, but your…
Foreign Judgments under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 A foreign judgment plays an important role in determining the conclusiveness of decisions passed by foreign courts and their enforcement in India. The Indian Civil Procedure Code (CPC), 1908, under Sections 2(5), 2(6), 13, 14 and 44A, along with principles of res judicata, lays down the rules regarding when and how such judgments are binding in India. Meaning of Foreign Court and Foreign Judgment • Section 2(5), CPC: “Foreign Court” means a court situated outside India and not established or continued by the authority of the Central Government. • Section 2(6), CPC: “Foreign Judgment” means the judgment of a foreign court. Thus, for a judgment to be treated as a foreign judgment in India, it must come from a court situated outside India and not recognized as an Indian court. Res Judicata and Foreign Judgment • Section 11 CPC (Res Judicata) does not directly apply to foreign judgments. • However, the broad principle of res judicata applies under Section 13 CPC, provided that the conditions laid down therein are satisfied. When is a Foreign Judgment Conclusive? (Section 13 CPC) A foreign judgment shall be conclusive as to any matter directly adjudicated upon between the same parties under the same title, except in the following situations: 1. Lack of Jurisdiction – The foreign court had no jurisdiction. 2. Not on Merits – Judgment not passed after considering evidence and applying judicial mind. 3. Incorrect View of International Law / Ignoring Indian Law – When Indian law is applicable but ignored. 4. Violation of Natural Justice – No fair hearing, no summons served, or denial of opportunity to cross-examine. 5. Fraud – Judgment obtained by fraud or misrepresentation. 6. Breach of Indian Law – Judgment based on a claim violating Indian law. Effect: If none of the above exceptions apply, the Indian courts are bound to treat the foreign judgment as final and conclusive. Key Requirements for Binding Effect For a foreign judgment to operate conclusively in India: • Parties must be the same (or their representatives). • They must sue under the same title. • The matter (issue) decided must be the same. Example: If A sues B in the U.S. court and the matter is decided, then A cannot re-litigate the same issue in India, subject to Section 13 exceptions. Presumption as to Jurisdiction and Genuineness • Section 14 CPC: When a certified copy of a foreign judgment is produced, the Indian court shall presume the foreign court had jurisdiction, unless proved otherwise. • Section 86 Evidence Act (old Sec. 88 BSA): The Indian court may presume certified copies of foreign judicial records to be genuine. Thus, once a certified copy is filed, the burden shifts to the opposite party to prove lack of jurisdiction or any exception under Section 13. Jurisdiction of Foreign Courts – Section 13(a) CPC For a foreign court to have jurisdiction: 1. The parties must be domiciled in that foreign country, or 2. They must consent to its jurisdiction (expressly or by acquiescence). • If summons is received and the party contests on merits without objecting to jurisdiction → jurisdiction by acquiescence. • If summons is ignored or objection is raised → foreign court has no jurisdiction. Clause (b) & (d): Judgment on Merits & Natural Justice • Judgment on Merits (Clause b): Only when both parties were heard, evidence was considered, and judicial mind was applied. An ex parte decree without evidence is not on merits. • Violation of Natural Justice (Clause d): Where summons not served, no opportunity of hearing/cross-examination given. Often, both clauses overlap. Clause (e): Foreign Judgment Obtained by Fraud Fraud vitiates all judicial proceedings. Examples: • Jurisdictional Fraud: False claim of domicile. • Fraud in Service of Summons: Fabricated proof of service. • Fraudulent Evidence/Documents: False documents presented. Such decrees are not conclusive under Section 13. • Clause (c) & (f): Incorrect Law / Breach of Indian Law • Clause (c): When Indian law is applicable but foreign court applies foreign law. • Clause (f): When decree is based on a breach of Indian law, it is not conclusive. Important Case Laws • Narsimha Rao v. Venkata Lakshmi (1999, SC): U.S. divorce decree held invalid due to lack of jurisdiction, fraud, violation of natural justice, wrong law applied. • Satya v. Teja Singh (1975, SC): U.S. divorce decree invalid – husband falsely claimed domicile. • Gurdas Mann v. Mohinder Singh Brar (1993, P&H HC): Ex parte decree without evidence not conclusive. • International Woollen Mills v. Standard Wool (2000, SC): Burden of proving exceptions lies on the party challenging the judgment. Execution of Foreign Decrees Foreign judgments can be executed in India in two ways: 1. Direct Execution (Sec. 44A CPC): • Applicable only to money decrees from superior courts of reciprocating territories. • Such decrees can be directly filed for execution in Indian courts. 2. Filing a Fresh Suit: • For non-money decrees, or decrees from non-reciprocating territories. • A certified copy of the foreign judgment is filed, and the Indian court passes its own decree. Conclusion The CPC strikes a balance between respecting foreign judicial decisions and protecting Indian legal sovereignty. While Section 13 CPC makes foreign judgments conclusive, it also provides safeguards against lack of jurisdiction, fraud, violation of natural justice, or breach of Indian law. Sections 14 and 44A CPC further regulate the presumption of validity and execution of such decrees. Thus, foreign judgments are respected in India, but only when they meet the tests of fairness, jurisdiction, and conformity with Indian law. ✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324 At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need: •Subject-wise expert classes •Mock test series •Legal current affairs •Personalized mentorship for interview preparation “Your law degree is your foundation, but your preparation is what will build your success.” Join Our New Batch Now! Prepare smart. Prepare…
Haryana ADA 2025 Recruitment and Preparation Guide
Haryana ADA Recruitment 2025 Notification and Guide to Preparation 255 Vacancies Announced The Haryana Public Service Commission (HPSC) has issued the official notification (Advertisement No. 18/2025) for the recruitment of Assistant District Attorney (ADA) posts. A total of 255 vacancies are available across various categories. Main Dates Notification Release Date: 8 August 2025 Application Start Date: 13 August 2025 Application Last Date: 2 September 2025 Screening Test Date: 02.11.2025 Eligibility Criteria Educational Qualification: Degree in Law (LLB) from a recognised institution. Age Limit: 21–42 years as on 2 January 2025. Age Relaxation: As per Haryana government rules. Selection Process The recruitment process will be conducted in multiple stages: Screening Test (Objective) Subject Knowledge Test (Descriptive) Interview/Viva-Voce Document Verification Medical Examination Exam Stages Stage 1: Screening Test Total Questions: 100 Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) Total Marks: 100 Duration: 2 hours Marking Scheme: All questions carry equal marks. Options per Question: Each question will have five options; the fifth option is for candidates who choose to leave the question unattempted. Negative Marking: Wrong answer: Deduction of 0.25 marks per question. Unattempted without marking the fifth option: Deduction of 0.25 marks per question. Language: Question paper will be available in both English and Hindi. Qualifying Marks: Minimum 25% marks required to clear the Screening Test. Topics / Syllabus – Screening Test General Science (TOA’s GK/GS + Ghatna Chakra) or Lucent or OR NCERT OLD EDITION CLASS 6TH TO 12TH Current Events – National and International Importance (Last 1 year you can cover this from any app for current affairs such as GK Today or Arihant Yearly Current Affairs) History of India (Ancient, Medieval, Modern our TOA GK/GS lectures + Ghatna Chakra) Indian and World Geography (TOA’s GS + Ghatna Chakra) Indian Culture, Indian Polity, and Indian Economy (TOA’s GK/GS + Ghatna Chakra) General Mental Ability – Reasoning and Analytical Abilities- R.S. Aggarwal Basic Numeracy (Class X level) – Numbers and their relations, order of magnitude, etc.- R S Agarwal Data Interpretation (Class X level) – Charts, graphs, tables, data sufficiency, etc.- R S Agarwal Haryana General Knowledge – History, Geography, Polity, Economy, Culture, etc. Haryana GK: Arihant “Know Your State Haryana”. Stage 2: Subject Knowledge Test Duration: 3 hours Total Marks: 150 Language: Question paper will be available in English and Hindi. Type of Paper: Subjective (descriptive answers required). Minimum Qualifying Marks: A candidate must secure at least 35% marks to be eligible for the interview/viva-voce. Shortlisting for Interview: Candidates will be called for the interview in a ratio of 2 times the number of advertised posts (plus bracketed candidates, if any). Only those securing the minimum 35% cut-off marks will be considered. Weightage in Final Selection: Subject Knowledge Test carries 87.5% weightage in the final merit calculation. Minimum qualifying: 35%. Syllabus: Civil Law CPC Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 Indian Contract Act Indian Partnership Act Sale of Goods Act Hindu Law Mohammedan Law & Customary Law Criminal Law Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 Stage 3: Interview Weightage in Final Selection: 12.5% of the total marks. Final Merit List Preparation: The final merit list will be prepared by adding the marks obtained in the Subject Knowledge Test (which carries 87.5% weightage) and the Interview (which carries 12.5% weightage). Final selection will be based on the combined performance in all stages. Essential Qualifications Educational Qualification: Bachelor’s Degree in Law (Professional) from a recognised university. Language Requirement: Hindi or Sanskrit up to Matriculation level or higher. Professional Requirement: Must be enrolled as an Advocate with a Bar Council. Shortlisting for Subject Knowledge Test: Candidates up to four times the number of advertised posts, plus bracketed candidates (in case of tie at the cut-off), will be called for the Subject Knowledge Test, provided they have scored at least 25% in the Screening Test. Final Merit: Marks obtained in the Screening Test will not be counted towards the final selection; it is solely for shortlisting candidates by category. How to Apply (Online) Visit the official HPSC website:gov.in Click on the “Apply Online” link for HPSC ADA Recruitment 2025. Fill in your personal, educational, and contact details. Upload all required documents. Pay the application fee. Submit the form and download a copy for future reference. Application Fee General/Other State candidates: ₹1000 General/OBC/EWS (Haryana): ₹250 Mode of Payment: Online
Res Judicata under Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Meaning & Origin The term Res Judicata comes from Latin, where “Res” means thing or matter and “Judicata” means adjudged or decided. In simple terms, it is a legal doctrine that prevents the re-litigation of a matter already decided by a competent court. This doctrine is based on three maxims: 1. Nemo debet bis vexari pro una et eadem causa – No person should be vexed twice for the same cause. 2. Interest republicae ut sit finis litium – It is in the interest of the State that litigation must come to an end. 3. Res judicata pro veritate occipitur – A judicial decision must be accepted as correct. Statutory Provision Section 11 CPC states: “No Court shall try any suit or issue in which the matter directly and substantially in issue has been directly and substantially in issue in a former suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim, litigating under the same title, in a Court competent to try such subsequent suit or the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised, and has been heard and finally decided by such Court.” The section contains eight explanations clarifying terms like “former suit”, “competence of court”, “constructive res judicata”, and application in execution proceedings. • Conditions for Application For res judicata to apply, the following must be satisfied: 1. The matter must be directly and substantially in issue in both suits. 2. The prior suit must be between the same parties or their legal representatives. 3. The parties must have litigated under the same title. 4. The earlier court must have been competent to try the later suit. 5. The matter must have been heard and finally decided. ✓ Matter in Issue Types of Issues • Issue of Fact – Always operates as res judicata. • Issue of Law – Only when connected with facts. • Mixed Issue of Fact & Law – Also operates as res judicata. The Supreme Court in Mathura Prasad v. Dossibai held that a decision on a point of law operates as res judicata if it is not independent of the facts of the case. • Classification 1. Directly and Substantially in Issue Essential for the decision of the case. Example: Dispute over ownership or tenancy in an eviction case. 2. Collaterally or Incidentally in Issue Side issues arising in the case; findings here do not bar re-litigation. √ Constructive Res Judicata (Explanation IV to Section 11 CPC) If a party could and should have raised a ground in a previous suit but did not, the law will treat it as if it had been raised and decided. Test: • Is the present issue connected to the earlier suit? • Could and should it have been raised earlier? • Was it known or discoverable with due diligence? Example: State of U.P. v. Nawab Hussain – Second suit on a new ground barred because it could have been raised earlier. ∆ Parties Covered • Same Parties – Even if roles are reversed (plaintiff ↔ defendant). • Co-defendants & Co-plaintiffs – If there was a necessary conflict decided in the earlier suit. • Parties Claiming Under Same Title – Through sale, gift, succession, will, lease, etc. • Representative Suits – Under Explanation VI, bona fide litigation on public/common rights binds all interested parties. • Competency of Court The competence of the former court is judged as on the date of the first suit. It can be: • Exclusive jurisdiction courts (e.g., Revenue Court). • Limited jurisdiction courts (decision still binding). • Concurrent jurisdiction courts. ✓ Final Decision Requirement Res judicata applies only if the earlier decision was on merits, including: • Ex parte decrees (if on merits). • Decrees on awards. ✓ No res judicata if dismissed for technical reasons like: • Lack of jurisdiction • Non-joinder of parties • Improper valuation • Premature suit Special Points • Withdrawal of suit – No bar. • Compromise decree – Not res judicata, but estoppel may apply. • Appeal pending – Decision loses finality; becomes res sub judice. • Not applicable to Habeas Corpus petitions. • Res Judicata vs Estoppel Res Judicata:-Based on court’s decision Estoppel:-Based on party’s conduct Res Judicata:-Public policy – end litigation Estoppel:-Equity – prevent inconsistent statements Res Judicata:-Bars jurisdiction Estoppel:-Rule of evidence Res Judicata:-Binds both parties Estoppel:-Binds only the party making earlier representation ∆ Exceptions 1. Waiver of plea. 2. Interlocutory orders. 3. Dismissal of SLP without reasons. 4. Different cause of action. 5. Judgment by fraud or collusion. 6. Court lacking jurisdiction. 7. Change in law creating new rights. ✓ Leading Cases • Daryao v. State of U.P. – Writ under Article 32 barred after dismissal under Article 226. • State of U.P. v. Nawab Hussain – New ground in later suit barred. • Devilal Modi v. STO – Second writ petition on new grounds barred. • Sulochana Amma v. Narayanan Nair – Even limited jurisdiction courts’ decisions can bind. Conclusion The doctrine of res judicata is a cornerstone of civil justice. It ensures finality of litigation, prevents multiplicity of suits, and protects the authority of judicial decisions. However, its application must balance justice and fairness, avoiding injustice under the guise of finality. ✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324 At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need: •Subject-wise expert classes •Mock test series •Legal current affairs •Personalized mentorship for interview preparation “Your law degree is your foundation, but your preparation is what will build your success.” Join Our New Batch Now! Prepare smart. Prepare with Theory of Abrogation. Contact Us: B-109, Commercial Complex Dr. Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi-09 +91 9971399324 | +91 8840961324 [email protected]
Res Sub Judice: Stay of Suit under section 10 cpc
Res Sub Judice: Stay of Suit under Section 10 CPC Introduction Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) embodies the doctrine of Res Sub Judice, which literally means “a matter under judicial consideration”. The provision is aimed at preventing simultaneous trials of two suits in different courts when the matter in issue is the same, thereby avoiding conflicting decisions and multiplicity of proceedings. Statutory Provision Section 10 reads as follows: “No court shall proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is also directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title where such suit is pending in the same or any other court in India having jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed, or in any court beyond the limits of India established or constituted by the Central Government and having like jurisdiction, or before the Supreme Court.” Explanation: The pendency of a suit in a foreign court does not preclude Indian courts from trying a suit founded on the same cause of action. Object of Section 10 The primary purpose of Section 10 is: • To avoid multiplicity of proceedings. • To prevent two courts of concurrent jurisdiction from trying the same matter at the same time. • To avoid the risk of conflicting decisions. Conditions for Applicability For Section 10 to apply, the following conditions must be satisfied: 1. There must be two suits – one previously instituted and another subsequently instituted. 2. The matter in issue in the subsequent suit must be directly and substantially in issue in the previous suit. 3. Both suits must be between the same parties or their representatives. 4. The parties must be litigating under the same title in both suits. 5. The previously instituted suit must be pending in a court having jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed in the subsequent suit. 6. Section 10 applies only to suits (including appeals) and not to applications or complaints. ✓ Meaning of “Matter in Issue” The expression “matter in issue” means the entire matter in controversy in the suit, not just some issues. Mere overlapping of issues is insufficient. Example: Recovery of rent for one period and rent for a later period with ejectment would not be considered the same matter in issue. Illustrations 1. Claim for Rent: A sues B for rent. B denies rent is due. The claim for rent is directly and substantially in issue. 2. Title & Rent: A sues B for declaration of title and for rent of the same land. Both title and rent are directly and substantially in issue. 3. Trademark Dispute: If A company sues B company for infringement and B files a similar suit against A in another court, the latter must be stayed. Scope of Section 10 • Bar on Trial, Not Institution: Section 10 does not prohibit filing of a subsequent suit; it only bars its trial until the earlier suit is decided. • Mandatory Nature: The provision is mandatory and applies whenever conditions are met. • Inherent Powers: If conditions are not strictly met, courts can use inherent powers under Section 151 CPC to stay proceedings in the interest of justice. Effect of Contravention A decree passed in contravention of Section 10 is not void; it remains valid unless set aside. The rule can also be waived by parties if they consent to proceed with the subsequent suit. Interim Orders A stay of the suit does not prevent the court from passing interim orders such as injunctions, appointment of receiver, attachment before judgment, etc. Test for Applicability The key test is whether the decision in the earlier suit would operate as res judicata in the later suit. If yes, the later suit must be stayed. Consolidation of Suits To avoid conflicting judgments, courts may consolidate suits between the same parties involving substantially the same issues. ∆ Difference between Res Judicata and Res Sub Judice 1. Res Judicata: Applies to matters already adjudicated (final decision). 2. Res Sub Judice: Applies to matters pending decision in a previously instituted suit. Conclusion Section 10 CPC is a procedural safeguard ensuring judicial discipline by avoiding parallel trials over the same dispute. While it bars the trial of a subsequent suit, it leaves room for necessary interim relief and consolidation, ultimately aiming to protect the integrity and efficiency of the judicial process. ✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324 At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need: •Subject-wise expert classes •Mock test series •Legal current affairs •Personalized mentorship for interview preparation “Your law degree is your foundation, but your preparation is what will build your success.” Join Our New Batch Now! Prepare smart. Prepare with Theory of Abrogation. Contact Us: B-109, Commercial Complex Dr. Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi-09 +91 9971399324 | +91 8840961324 [email protected]
Bar of Suits under Section 9 CPC, Limitation Act, Order 2 Rule 2 & Order 9 Rule 9 1. Section 9 CPC — Courts to Try All Civil Suits Unless Barred Text of Section 9 The courts shall (subject to the provisions herein contained) have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred. Principle This provision is based on the maxim Ubi jus ibi remedium — where there is a right, there is a remedy. Every civil suit is maintainable unless barred by law. If any law creates rights and liabilities but does not provide a remedy, an aggrieved person can approach the civil court for enforcement. Absence of a mechanism to enforce rights renders them meaningless. The word shall in Section 9 makes it mandatory for courts to exercise jurisdiction when conditions are fulfilled. Key Case Laws: • Shiv Kumar v. Municipal Corporation, Delhi (1993 SC) — Every right has a remedy; civil court jurisdiction is presumed unless barred. • Bhatia Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. v. D.C. Patel (1953 SC) — Civil court has inherent power to decide the question of its own jurisdiction. Burden to prove lack of jurisdiction lies on the defendant. Burden of Proof and Presumption • Presumption: Court presumes it has jurisdiction. • Burden: Lies on the defendant to prove lack of jurisdiction. • Authority: The same court decides on its own jurisdiction. Example: A sues B in Delhi for recovery of ₹5 lakh. B claims the contract was made and to be performed in Mumbai. A need not prove jurisdiction; B must disprove it. 1.1 Civil Suit vs. Suit of Civil Nature • Civil Suit: Private legal rights are violated — e.g., property, contract, rights, status. • Civil Nature: Wider scope; includes matters with religious/social elements if legal rights are involved. Types: 1. Pure Civil Suit — Only legal rights involved. Example: Recovery of debt under contract. 2. Civil Nature with Religious/Social Elements — Legal right involved despite religious context. Example: Removal from salaried Imam post without notice. 3. Not a Civil Suit — No legal right involved, purely religious or social issue. Example: Expulsion from caste without affecting any legal right. Illustrative Case: Ayodhya Case (M. Siddiq v. Mahant Suresh Das, 2019) — Though religious issues were present, the core dispute was ownership/possession of property, making it a suit of civil nature. 1.2 Suits Expressly or Impliedly Barred • Expressly Barred: Clear statutory provision excluding civil court jurisdiction. Example: Section 293 of Income Tax Act; special tribunals for revenue, rent, elections, etc. • Impliedly Barred: Not expressly excluded, but barred by implication due to special remedies/public policy. Example: Land Acquisition Act is a complete code — jurisdiction impliedly barred (Laxmi Chand v. Gram Panchayat). Dhulabhai Test (1969 SC): Laid down guidelines to determine when civil jurisdiction is excluded, including adequacy of statutory remedies, violation of mandatory provisions, and fraud. 2. Bar under the Limitation Act 2.1 Concept The Limitation Act, 1963 fixes time limits for filing suits, appeals, and applications. Filing after the prescribed period bars the remedy, though the substantive right may survive (except in property possession cases under Section 27). Maxims: • Interest republicae ut sit finis litium — It is in the State’s interest to end litigation. • Vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt — Law assists the vigilant, not those who sleep over rights. Key Points: • Bars remedy only, not the right (except Sec. 27). • Criminal proceedings generally not subject to limitation unless expressly provided. • Writ petitions under Arts. 32 and 226 not covered by Limitation Act. Section 3: Court must dismiss cases filed beyond limitation even if not pleaded by the defendant. Section 4: If limitation expires on a holiday, filing can be done on reopening. Section 5: Allows condonation of delay in appeals/applications (not suits) if sufficient cause is shown. 2.2 Exclusion of Time (Secs. 12–15) Certain periods are excluded when computing limitation — e.g., obtaining certified copies, filing in wrong court in good faith, stay orders, defendant abroad, government consent time, etc. 2.3 Postponement of Limitation (Secs. 16–23) Start of limitation delayed due to: • Minority/insanity of parties • Fraud/mistake • Written acknowledgment or part-payment • Continuing breach/tort • Addition of new parties • Special damage cases 3. Bar under Order 2 Rule 2 CPC Principle A plaintiff must include the whole claim arising from one cause of action in one suit. If part of the claim is omitted intentionally without court’s leave, a second suit for that part is barred. Key Cases: • Gurbux Singh v. Bhooralal (1964 SC) — Provision is penal; should be strictly construed. • Kewal Singh v. Lajwanti (1980 SC) — Three tests for applicability: 1. Is the cause of action identical? 2. Could the relief have been claimed in the previous suit? 3. Was the relief omitted without leave? • Arjun Lal v. Mriganka Mohan (1975 SC) — Rule applies only to same cause of action, not distinct ones. Object: Prevent splitting of claims and multiplicity of suits. 4. Bar under Order 9 Rule 9 CPC When a suit is dismissed for default of plaintiff’s appearance (O. 9 R. 8), and no restoration is sought or restoration fails, a fresh suit on the same cause of action is barred. Key Points: • Plaintiff may seek restoration by showing sufficient cause. • If cause is proved, reopening is mandatory (Raman v. Arunachalam, 1936). • Bar applies to the same cause of action even if the defendant changes (e.g., legal heirs). Illustration: A sues B for possession, suit dismissed for default. B dies, his widow C occupies. A sues C for same possession — barred under O. 9 R. 9 as cause of action is the same. Conclusion The CPC and Limitation Act together ensure that: • Civil courts hear all disputes involving legal rights unless barred. • Time limits are respected to prevent stale claims. • Plaintiffs cannot split claims (O. 2…
Introduction, Filing, and Essentials of a Suit under CPC Introduction In Indian law, legislation is broadly divided into two categories: 1. Substantive Law – Determines the rights and liabilities of parties. • Examples: Indian Contract Act, Transfer of Property Act, Law of Torts, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). 2. Adjective or Procedural Law – Prescribes the procedure and machinery for enforcing those rights and liabilities. • Examples: Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), Limitation Act, Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). Maxim: Ubi jus ibi remedium – “Where there is a right, there is a remedy.” Application in Indian Law • Substantive law creates legal rights. • Remedies for violation include compensation or injunction. • Procedural law (like CPC) provides the mechanism to enforce these rights. • CPC itself does not create rights but offers the forum and procedure to claim them. Case Reference: Ghanshyam Dass v. Dominion of India (AIR 1984 SC 1004) – Procedural law breathes life into substantive rights. Role and Scope of the CPC • Enacted: 21 March 1908 • Commencement: 1 January 1909 • First CPC: 1859, revised in 1861, 1877, 1879, and 1882. • Extent: Applies to the whole of India except Nagaland and tribal areas. CPC’s Complementary Role: Where substantive law grants rights, CPC provides the procedure to enforce them. The maxim ubi jus ibi remedium becomes meaningful only with an effective procedure. Scope: • CPC is exhaustive in matters it covers. • Where silent, courts use inherent powers under Section 151 CPC to ensure justice. • Case Reference: Manohar Lal Chopra v. Seth Hiralal (1962) – Courts can act to meet the ends of justice when the Code is silent. Object and Structure of the CPC Object:To consolidate and amend the laws relating to the procedure of civil courts. Scheme of the Code: • Body: 158 sections – general principles. • Schedule 1: 51 Orders & Rules – detailed procedures. • Longest Order: Order 21 with 106 rules. Amendments: • 1976, 1999, 2002, and 2015 – to keep the law in line with social and technological changes. Important Stages of a Civil Suit 1. Presentation of plaint 2. Service of summons 3. Appearance of parties 4. Ex-parte decree 5. Interlocutory proceedings 6. Filing of written statement 7. Production of documents 8. Examination of parties 9. Discovery and inspection 10. Admission 11. Framing of issues 12. Summoning witnesses 13. Hearing & examination 14. Arguments 15. Judgment 16. Preparation of decree 17. Appeal, review, revision 18. Execution of decree Procedure Before Filing a Suit Before filing, check: 1. If the case is of civil nature (Sec. 9 CPC). 2. Res sub judice – Whether a similar case is pending (Sec. 10 CPC). 3. Res judicata – Whether already decided (Sec. 11 CPC). 4. Limitation – Whether within the time limit. 5. Order 2 Rule 2 CPC – Relief not claimed earlier. 6. Order 9 Rule 9 CPC – Bar against re-filing dismissed suit. Filing Procedure of a Suit Documents Required: 1. Case Information Format (Index) 2. Memo of Parties 3. Plaint 4. Affidavit in Support of Plaint 5. Interim Applications (if any) 6. Affidavit in Support of Application 7. Address Form 8. List of Documents with annexures 9. Vakalatnama (if through advocate) 10. Second Set of Plaint for service on opposite party ∆ Below are the pictures of documents used while filling a plaint Essentials of a Suit As per Section 26 CPC, a suit is instituted by presentation of a plaint. 1. Cause of Action A combination of a legal right + its violation. • Without cause of action → plaint rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. • Burden of proof lies on the plaintiff. Example: • Loan not repaid or breach of contract → Cause of action arises when the right is violated. 2. Subject Matter of Suit The actual thing or right in dispute. • Proprietary (property-related) • Personal (personal rights like contract, divorce, defamation). 3. Parties to a Suit a. Joinder of Plaintiffs (Order 1 Rule 1) – Multiple plaintiffs allowed if: 1. Same act/transaction, and 2. Common question of law/fact. b. Joinder of Defendants (Order 1 Rule 3) – Multiple defendants allowed if: 1. Right to relief arises from same act, and 2. Common question of law/fact. c. Necessary and Proper Parties: • Necessary Party – Without whom no effective decree can be passed. • Proper Party – Not essential but aids in complete adjudication. d. Pro Forma Defendant: Added formally without claiming relief against them but necessary for proper decision. 4. Relief The remedy claimed in the suit (damages, injunction, specific performance). Affidavit with Pleadings – Mandatory Section 26 CPC mandates that facts in plaint must be proved by affidavit. Case Reference: Salem Advocates Bar Association v. Union of India (2005) – Affidavits prevent false claims, save judicial time, and ensure responsibility. Conclusion The CPC is the backbone of civil justice in India, ensuring that substantive rights are not mere paper declarations but can be effectively enforced. Understanding introduction, filing, and essentials of a suit is crucial for law students, advocates, and judiciary aspirants to navigate civil litigation effectively. ✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324 At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need: •Subject-wise expert classes •Mock test series •Legal current affairs •Personalized mentorship for interview preparation “Your law degree is your foundation, but your preparation is what will build your success.” Join Our New Batch Now! Prepare smart. Prepare with Theory of Abrogation. Contact Us: B-109, Commercial Complex Dr. Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi-09 +91 9971399324 | +91 8840961324 [email protected]
Juristic Personality 1. Concept of Legal Personality In every legal system, there must be entities that can hold rights and bear duties. These entities are called legal persons. A legal person may be: • A natural person (human being) – exists by nature, recognized by law. • A juristic person (artificial person) – created by law, such as companies, states, and institutions. Definition (Salmond): A person is any being whom the law regards as capable of rights and duties. Statutory Definition: • Section 11, IPC and Section 2(26), BNS – “Person” includes companies, associations, and bodies of persons, whether incorporated or not. 2. Natural vs Juristic Persons • Natural Persons: Born with personality; e.g., citizens, residents. • Juristic Persons: Granted personality by legal recognition; e.g., corporations, municipal bodies, universities, religious institutions. 3. Types of Juristic Persons A. Corporations:-A corporation is an artificial legal person with separate identity from its members. (i) Corporation Sole • A single office that continues despite change of holder. • Examples: President of India, Governor of a State, CAG. • Salmond calls it “two persons in one” — the human and the permanent office. (ii) Corporation Aggregate • A group of persons forming one legal entity. • Created by charter, by statute, or by registration. • Examples: RBI, Infosys Ltd, BMC. B. Corporate Personality • Case: Salomon v. Salomon (1897) – Established that a company is a separate legal entity. • Rights: Own property, sue and be sued, enter into contracts. • Acts through agents/directors. C. Religious Institutions as Juristic Persons • Pramatha Nath Mullick v. Pradyumna Kumar Mullick (1925) – Hindu idols recognized as legal persons capable of owning property and suing. D. The State • Under Article 300, Constitution of India – Union and State governments can sue and be sued in their own names. 4. Entities Without Separate Legal Personality • Unincorporated Associations – Social clubs, trade associations; cannot sue in own name. • Partnership Firms – Not distinct legal persons, but can sue/be sued if registered. • Registered Trade Unions – Recognized by statute; have limited rights. 5. Special Situations A. Double Capacity One human can act in multiple legal roles (e.g., individual & trustee) but still has one legal personality. B. Legal Status of a Dead Person • Legal personality ends with death. • Certain rights remain protected: dignity of burial, protection from defamation, enforcement of will. C. Legal Status of an Unborn Child • Can hold certain rights subject to birth. • Example: Section 13, Transfer of Property Act – property can be transferred for benefit of unborn. 6. Theories of Corporate Personality 1. Fiction Theory – Corporation is an artificial creation of law (Savigny). 2. Concession Theory – Personality exists because the state allows (Dicey, Salmond). 3. Realist Theory – Corporation is a real social group (Gierke, Maitland). 4. Bracket Theory – Corporate name is just a symbolic bracket for members (Ihering). 5. Purpose Theory – Personality exists only to fulfill specific purposes (Brinz). 6. Hohfeld’s Theory – Only humans truly have rights; corporation is a legal method. 7. Doctrine of Lifting the Corporate Veil General Rule: Company is separate from members (Salomon). Exception: Courts may “lift the veil” to find real persons controlling the company. When Applied: • Fraud or improper conduct (Gilford Motor Co. v. Horne, 1933) • Evasion of obligations (Jones v. Lipman, 1962) • Public interest or prevention of crime (DDA v. Skipper Construction, 1996) 8. Corporate Liability • Civil Liability – For breach of contract, negligence, etc. • Criminal Liability – For offences where fine is applicable; directors/officers may also be liable. • Cases: Satyam Scandal (2009), Bhopal Gas Tragedy (1984). Conclusion The concept of juristic personality is one of the cornerstones of modern law. By granting legal recognition to artificial entities like corporations, institutions, and even religious idols, the legal system allows them to own property, enter into contracts, and be held liable — just like natural persons. This concept facilitates commerce, governance, and social organization. However, the law also ensures accountability by doctrines like lifting the corporate veil, ensuring that legal personality is not misused as a shield for fraud or injustice. ✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324 At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need: •Subject-wise expert classes •Mock test series •Legal current affairs •Personalized mentorship for interview preparation “Your law degree is your foundation, but your preparation is what will build your success.” Join Our New Batch Now! Prepare smart. Prepare with Theory of Abrogation. Contact Us: B-109, Commercial Complex Dr. Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi-09 +91 9971399324 | +91 8840961324 [email protected]
Ownership and Possession in Jurisprudence – Meaning, Essentials, Types, and Case Laws Ownership and possession are two core concepts in jurisprudence and property law. While often related, ownership is the ultimate legal right over a thing, whereas possession refers to physical control or holding of that thing. This distinction is vital for law students, judiciary exam aspirants, and legal professionals because courts often decide property disputes based on these concepts. Ownership – Meaning and Significance Ownership means having legal rights over a property or object. It is not just physical control; it covers a bundle of rights, such as: • Claiming possession • Using and enjoying • Transferring or disposing • Protecting against interference by others Salmond’s view: Ownership is a legal relationship between a person and a thing, which includes rights in rem (enforceable against the whole world). Austin’s view: Ownership is a right against everyone, not limited by time, usage, or method of transfer. Essentials of Ownership 1. Right of Possession • Even if the owner is not in actual possession, the law recognizes their right to claim it. Example: If M’s watch is stolen, M remains the owner and can recover it. 2. Right to Use and Enjoy • Owner may: • Manage the property • Use it personally • Earn income from it These are liberties, not always strict legal rights. 3. Right to Consume, Destroy, or Transfer (Alienate) • Owner can: • Eat, use up, or destroy the thing • Sell, gift, or mortgage it (Subject to legal restrictions – e.g., land sale to foreigners may be restricted.) 4. Indeterminate Duration • Ownership lasts until voluntarily transferred or abandoned. • After death, it passes to heirs. 5. Residuary Character • Even after granting rights to others (e.g., tenancy), the remaining rights stay with the owner. Ownership vs. Possession • Ownership = Legal title • Possession = Actual holding or control Example: A landlord owns a house but the tenant possesses it. A thief possesses a watch, but ownership remains with the lawful owner. Encumbrances on Ownership An encumbrance is a limitation or burden on ownership rights, where another person has some right over the property. Common examples: • Lease – Tenant’s right to occupy • Servitude – Right of way over land • Mortgage/Security – Creditor’s interest in property What Can Be Owned? Ownership is not limited to physical property. It can include: • Physical assets – land, buildings, vehicles • Rights – debt recovery, patent rights • Investments – stocks, bonds Salmond: Law protects rights, not objects directly — so ownership is always of a right. How Ownership is Acquired According to Salmond, ownership can be acquired: 1. By Law – Without any action (e.g., inheritance) 2. By Act/Event – Original acquisition (first-time possession) or derivative acquisition (purchase, gift) Types of Ownership 1. Corporeal & Incorporeal – Physical things vs. rights 2. Trust & Beneficial Ownership – Trustee holds legal title; beneficiary enjoys benefits 3. Legal & Equitable – Indian law treats both equally 4. Sole & Co-ownership – Single owner vs. joint owners 5. Vested & Contingent – Absolute vs. conditional ownership Possession – Meaning and Legal Recognition Possession means having physical control over a thing with the intention to hold it. Before law existed, possession was a natural fact; later, law started protecting it for maintaining peace and order. Salmond: Possession is actual holding (possession in fact) + intention (animus possidendi). Essentials of Possession 1. Corpus Possessionis (Physical Control) • Ability to use and exclude others • Confidence that interference will not occur 2. Animus Possidendi (Intention to Possess) • Acting as if the property is one’s own • Not necessarily believing you are the legal owner • Savigny: True possession requires acting like an owner Kinds of Possession 1. Corporeal & Incorporeal – Tangible items vs. rights 2. Immediate & Mediate – Direct control vs. control through another 3. Adverse Possession – Long, open, and hostile possession without permission can lead to ownership 4. Possession in Fact & in Law – Actual control vs. legal right to control Modes of Acquiring Possession • Taking – With or without consent of the possessor • Delivery – Actual or constructive (surrender, transfer of legal control) Legal Importance of Possession • Evidence of Ownership – Presumed owner unless proven otherwise • Adverse Possession – Can ripen into ownership • Protection under Law – Section 6, Specific Relief Act protects possession from unlawful eviction • Transfer of Ownership – Often through possession Important Case Laws 1. Merry v. Green (1843) – No possession without intention 2. Armory v. Delamirie (1722) – Finder has rights against all except true owner 3. South Staffordshire Water Co. v. Sharman (1896) – Possession of land includes objects in it 4. Hannah v. Peel (1945) – Finder’s rights can prevail over absentee owner 5. Hibbert v. McKiernan (1948) – Trespasser cannot claim possession Possessory Remedies Possession is protected by: • Criminal law – Prevents unlawful dispossession • Tort law – Actions for wrongful interference • Property law – Section 6, Specific Relief Act: Even unlawful possession cannot be disturbed without due process Conclusion Ownership and possession, though closely related, are not the same. Ownership gives complete legal rights, while possession is physical control with intention. Law protects both to maintain peace, order, and property security. ✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324 At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need: •Subject-wise expert classes •Mock test series •Legal current affairs •Personalized mentorship for interview preparation “Your law degree is your foundation, but your preparation is what will build your success.” Join Our New Batch Now! Prepare smart. Prepare with Theory of Abrogation. Contact Us: B-109, Commercial Complex Dr. Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi-09 +91 9971399324 | +91 8840961324 [email protected]