Headline
The Supreme Court of India shed light on Order II Rule 2 of Civil Procedure Code (CPC) in relief barred by subsequent events.
Summary
The Supreme Court of India stated that Order II Rule 2 of Civil Procedure Code (CPC) does not bar a plaintiff from filing a subsequent suit for reliefs that were inaccessible at the time of the 1st suit but became possible due to a subsequent event, such as the lifting of a government ban.
Key Facts
- Case Name: Cuddalore Powergen Corporation Ltd v. M/s Chemplast Cuddalore Vinyls Ltd and Anr.
- Judges Name: Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan
- The 1st suit sought an injunction against alienation of property.
- Reliefs of specific performance and possession were omitted due to a ban by the government on registration of sale deeds.
- The ban was later lifted, activating a fresh cause of action (COA).
Legal Insights
- The Supreme Court of India reaffirmed that a subsequent suit is allowed when a fresh cause of action (COA) appears.
- Referenced rulings: Ramjilal v. Board of Revenue, Rajasthan and National Security Assurance Company Ltd. v. S.N. Jaggi.
Impact
This decision of the Supreme Court makes sure that the plaintiffs can claim reliefs which were inaccessible initially due to external constraints, protecting their rights.
Why It Matters
The ruling of the Supreme Court focuses on a fair and just application of Order II Rule 2 CPC, balancing procedural technicalities with substantive justice.
Source
Read also – ORDER II RULE 2 CPC DOESN’T MANDATE SINGLE SUIT FOR ALL CAUSES RULED BY SC