2nd Appeal–
Remanded to the High Court for deciding the appeal on merits– Relief of partition by meets and bounds of the suit property and, in consequence, also claimed her separate possession in the suit property. The appeal and remand the case to the High Court for deciding the second appeal afresh on merits in accordance with law. The case is now remanded to the High Court for deciding the appeal on merits in accordance with law. We, however, request the High Court to admit the second appeal, frame appropriate substantial questions of law as required under Section 100 of the Code, keeping in view the pleadings, findings of the two courts below and the documents (exhibits). Efforts should be made to settle the dispute amicably. Indeed, it was also stated by learned counsel for the appeal preferably within six months. .....Sk. Bhikan =VS= Mehamoodabee, (Civil), 2017 (2)– [3 LM (SC) 47] ....View Full Judgment

Representation of the People Act, 1951
Section 123(4) & 86 r/w
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Sec. 151 & Ord. VI Rule 16, Ord. VII Rule 11
Election is a technical one– The law relating to election is a technical one as it amounts to a challenge laid to the democratic process determining the will of the people. An eligible person whether a candidate or a voter coming to Court, seeking to set aside any election has to, thus, meet with the technical natures of the election petition and the provisions prescribed under the said Act as otherwise it would be fatal to the election petition at the threshold itself. It is in these circumstances that the principles have been succinctly set out in Mithilesh Kumar Pandey. The observations in that case provide for clerical and typographical errors to be corrected. Thus, issues like mentioning of the correct number of annexures or tagging with the file, etc. would all fall within the said Section. [8 supra] .....Abdulrasakh =VS= K.P. Mohammed, [4 LM (SC) 1] ....View Full Judgment

Res judicata–
An issue of law which arises between the same parties in a subsequent suit or proceeding is not res judicata if, by an erroneous decision given on a statutory prohibition in the former suit or proceeding. Res judicata cannot stand in the way of an erroneous interpretation of a statutory prohibition. The present is one such case. Therefore, the second order must also be set aside. The appeal is allowed. ...SCG Contracts India Pvt. Ltd.=VS=K.S. Chamankar Infras. Pvt. Ltd., (Civil), 2019 (1) [6 LM (SC) 24] ....View Full Judgment

Ex parte decree–
We are of the view that the Division Bench was justified in allowing the applications filed by defendant No.1 under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code and, in consequence, was justified in setting aside the preliminary decree dated 25.02.2003 passed in O.S. No.131/1999 treating the said decree as "ex parte decree".
Finding on the question of sufficient ground for setting aside of the ex parte decree is concerned, suffice it to say, it being a pure question of fact, the same does not call for any interference by this Court. A finding on such question is binding on this Court. Moreover, we find that the Division Bench imposed a cost of Rs.10,000/on defendant No.1 payable to the plaintiff as condition for setting aside the ex parte decree. Defendant No.1, therefore, must pay the cost to the plaintiff.
Since the original plaintiff has died and his legal representatives are already brought on record in these appeals, the Trial Court will permit the plaintiff to amend the cause title in the plaint and bring on record the legal representatives(appellants herein) to enable them to prosecute the suit on merits in accordance with law. ...G. Ratna Raj =VS= Sri Muthukumarasamy Permanent Fund Ltd., (Civil), 2019 (1) [6 LM (SC) 37] ....View Full Judgment