1.​ Appealable Order v.

Decree
a.​ Decree examples:
i.​ Rejection of plaint for non payment of court fees
ii.​ Suits filed without proof or evidence
iii.​ Orders for abetment of suit
iv.​ Dismissal of suit as time-barred (limitation)
v.​ Order holding appeal not maintainable
b.​ Not DECREE
i.​ Dismissal of appeal for default
ii.​ Appointment of commissioner
iii.​ Order admitting second appeal
c.​ Appealable Orders
i.​ Suppressing arbitration agreement
ii.​ Order stated in the form of a special court
iii.​ Modification or correction of an order
iv.​ Refusing to file arbitration agreement
d.​ The following are appealable:
i.​ Return of suit Order 7 Rule 10
ii.​ Suppressing an arbitration
iii.​ Award from special case
iv.​ Filing or refusing to file arb agreement
v.​ Staying or refusing to stay legal proceedings when there is an arb agreement
2.​ Stay: against the order of the Court
3.​ Foreign judgement not applicable if it is obtained by fraud, not propounded by competent
cout
4.​ Section 10 and Section 11
a.​ Section 11 Res judicata
i.​ Same parties
ii.​ Matter direct and substantial in issue is identical in the suit
iii.​ Suit disposed of by court of competent jurisdiction (if not competent, then res
judicata not applicable)
iv.​ Litigation under same title
b.​ Constructive Res Judicata [handerson v. handerson]
i.​ Adjudication is conclusive of not only matters which have been taken up but
matters which ought to have been taken up
5.​ Application for Restitution [section 144 CPC] is deemed decree
6.​ Application for probate is not considered decree
7.​ Commerical Disputes: plaint can be filed only by verification and affidavit by statement of
truth
8.​ Elements of Injunction
9.​ Elements of Plaint
a.​ Parties
i.​ Legal rep; blood ties or not
ii.​ Necessary Party
iii.​ Proper Party
iv.​ Non-Joinder of Party and effect during appeal [section 99 CPC]
b.​ Jurisdiction
i.​ Lack of jurisdiction [return of plaint section 10]
 ii.​ Jurisdictional error [rejection of plaint section 11]
iii.​ Types of jurisdiction
c.​ Cause of Action (bundle of rights)
i.​ Material facts
1.​ Material propositions
ii.​ Facts in Issue and Relevant Facts
iii.​ Mixed Question of Law and Fact
d.​ Relief/ Prayer
i.​ Order 2 rules
1.​ Relief to not be split
10.​ Elements of Decree
a.​ Adjudication: formal judicial process by which plaint is admitted and converted to
decree
b.​ Determination of rights and liabilities
c.​ Adjudication must be formal and final
d.​ Suit must start with a plaint and culminate in a decree
11.​ Amendment of Plaint/ Written Statement
a.​ When allowed liberally; when not allowed
b.​ Certain restrictions
12.​ Fraiming of Issues
a.​ Order 14
b.​ Preliminary Issues
c.​ Maintainability
13.​ Limitation Act
a.​ Section 5: Condonation of Delay
b.​ Section 14
14.​ Mesne Profits
a.​ Wrongful possessor
b.​ Profit + interest accrued
i.​ NATURAL USE OF LAND
ii.​ If improvements made by wrongful possessor, then not mesne profits and will
not be given to real owner
iii.​ Decree Partly preliminary (suit for eviction) and partly final (enquiry
conducted and mesne profits calculated)
15.​ Decree v. Order
16.​ If no appeal against Prelim Decree, then cannot appeal Final Decree
17.​ Interlocutory Supplemental Orders granting Immediate Relief
a.​ Receiver
b.​ Commission
c.​ Injunction
18.​ When Final Decree is Passed?
i.​ When highest court decides
ii.​ When no challenge/ appeal to final decree
iii.​ When decree completely disposes of the suit
19.​ Limited Jurisidiction: say a court can grant probate. Once probate granted, there cannot be a
fresh suit for another probate. As court has limited jurisdiction.

20.​ Amendment of Pleadings Order 6 Rule 17

 a.​Before framing issues
b.​After framing issues
c.​Should not change the nature and character of the suit
d.​LEAVE OF COURT is a condition precedent for application for amendment of
pleading
e.​ Amendment of pleading grant is a discretionary power
i.​ Should not violate provisions of law
ii.​ Not when it encroaches on justice
iii.​ Not when it violates the provisions of Law of Limitation
iv.​ Does not change the subject matter of the suit
f.​ Grant or Refusal to Amend is not a Decree
g.​ When can Amendment be declined: ​
i.​ When not necessary
ii.​ When new subject matter or changes the fundamental nature of the suit
iii.​ Where it takes away the legal right of the other party [ proposed amendment
must not prejudice the other party]
iv.​ When application is not bona fide
h.​ Revisional Court can interefere with refusal to amend pleading but must have
compelling and cogent reasons. Revisional Court is only concerned with application
of amendment and not the merits of the suit as that is the prerogative of the Lower
Court
21.​ Preliminary Decree: formal expression of adjudication that conclusively determines the rights
and liabilities of parties but does not completely dispose the suit
22.​ Revise Legal Representative

CASES:

1.​PV Shetty v. BS Giridhar

Fair rent application filed by the tenant whereas the subsequent suit was filed by landlord for
eviction
So first suit was filed by tenant for fair rent application(basically regarding the rent amount)
Subsequent suit was filed by landlord for eviction of tenant.
Whether sub-judice will apply?
Yes

Court stayed the eviction suit to avoid conflicting outcomes and the entire objective of section 10 is
to prevent parallel petitions and conflicting judgements from courts of competent jurisdictions.

Section 10: Res Sub Judice

-​ Previously instituted suit
 -​ Between same parties
-​ Same title/ cause of action/ issues
-​ Court is of similar or competent jurisdiction
-​ Issue is Pending
-​ The subsequently filed suit is going to be stayed
Section 10 is mandatory
Six Essential Conditions which should be fulfilled to satisfy Section 10:
-​ Applies to suits and not to orders, applications, petitions, complaints
-​ There must be two suits: one previously instituted and another subsequent one
-​ Between Same Parties
-​ Matter which is directly and substantially in issue must be identical in both the suits
-​ Court is competent to pass decree
-​ Claiming in litigation the same title
-​ Pending in Court of Competent Jurisdiction

2.​Nusli Nevil Wadia v. Ivory Properties

The practice of granting ad interim injunction without granting jurisdiction was said to be a grave
abuse. They had entered into a contract that Respondent would build certain immoveable property and
then sell the land. Plaintiff was to get 12% of the proceeds. Resp sold the property not to bonafide
third parties but to other companies and undersold it.
Ivory properties stated that limitation is barred.
Jurisdiction has to be decided as a preliminary issue. Ivory Properties contended that limitation falls
under jurisdiction
a.​ Existence of jurisdiction v. exercise of jurisdiction
i.​ Maharashtra Amendment Section 9A
ii.​ Preliminary Issue of Jurisdiction
1.​ Court needs to figure out jurisdiction prior to issuing injunctions
iii.​ Mixed Question of Law and Fact cannot be decided as a preliminary issue
iv.​ Question: Is the term ‘jurisdiction’ under Section 9A broad enough to
encompass limitation issues also to determine the maintainability of the suit?
1.​ NO.
2.​ Section 9A, the ambit of jurisdiction to curb the misuse of interim
relief provisions by ensuring that courts first determine their
jurisdiction before granting or setting aside injunctions
a.​ Limitation: a procedural bar which prevents initiation or
continuation of legal proceedings after a statutory period
3.​ Court must first determine whether court has jurisdiction or not
BEFORE GRANTING INTERIM RELEIF
3.​Mamta Kapoor v. Vinod Kumar Rai
a.​ Commercial Courts Act
Case was about whether immoveable property which will be used for “trade and
commerce” purpose in the future would fall under the definition of “commercial
disputes” under the Commercial Disputes Act.

So, commercial courts can only hear commercial disputes.

Facts: Parties had entered into an agreement for purchasing property and make it into
a hotel for commercial purposes. The hotel in question would come into existence in
the future. It wasnt so in the past. Some dispute happened between the parties and the
main question was: is the dispute commercial in nature so as to fall under the ambit of
Commercial Courts’ jurisdiction.

Commercial Disputes Act:- 22 types of disputes qualify as ‘commercial’ and there is

an exhaustive definition. The most troublesome category of commercial dispute is
“immoveable property for trade and commerce”

Court held that: in order for immoveable property to qualify as “immoveable property
for trade and commerce” so as to be categorized as a commercial dispute; the
immoveable property in question SHOULD BE IN EXISTENCE.
FUTURE USE OF THE PROPERTY FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES WILL
NOT QUALIFY AS COMMERCIAL DISPUTE (cross check once, there was some
HC case also on this)

4.​Gupte Cardiac Care Centre v. Olympic Pharma

a.​ Facts: hospital instituted suit in Nasik against Respondent in 2001. Dispute was
regarding delivery of heart and lung machines. Machine were bad. Hospital claimed
compensation and two installment paid for the machines.
i.​ The Cardiac Care Centre found the machine to be defective
b.​ Olympic Pharma filed a suit in Delhi HC to claim 20 lakhs for performance of
contract in 2002.
i.​ Contentions of the Parites were different. Claims were different. Both Suits
have to be heard to give equal opportunity for both claims to be heard. Two
parallel litigations cannot be so court decided to transfer the subsequent suit
filed by Pharma to the first one and ordered the clubbing of the sutis.
DID NOT ATTRACT SECTION 10: RES SUB JUDICE
Can Entertain Multiple Claims
Section 10 and Section 11 prevent multiplicity of proceedings

Court held that:

-​ Both transactions were interdependent
 5.​S Balwand Lokhande v. Chandrakant Shankar
Lokhande [can tie to Section 97: Appeal from
Final Decree when no Appeal from Preliminary
Decree]
a.​ When appeal against preliminary decree is not filed, right determined becomes final
and conclusive and the same cannot be questioned in final decree
b.​ Prelim decree not dependent upon final decree but final decree is a continuation of the
prelim decree if the preliminary decree has not been challenged or appealed

When is Final Decree passed:

-​ Completely disposes the suit
-​ When no appeal
-​ When decided by highest court

Facts:
-​ In 1955, a prelim decree was issued for partition which stated that Respondent was entitled to
1/6th share whereas Plaintiff and others were entitled to 5/6th of the share. Plaintiff did not
provide the necessary documents such as judicial stamps which prevented final decree from
being executed.
-​ Final Decree specifies division
-​ No execution without a final decree
-​ Final Decree is not a separate proceeding but a continuation of the preliminary decree
-​ So if no challenge to the preliminary decree, the rights outlined became final and
absolute
-​ Unchallenged prelim decree cannot be reopened during final decree proceedings