KONKAN TRADING COMPANY versus SURESH GOVIND KAMAT TARKAR & ORS.

KONKAN TRADING COMPANY versus SURESH GOVIND KAMAT TARKAR & ORS.

The costs ordered on withdrawal under Order XXIII Rule 1(3) CPC did not constitute a condition precedent for filing a fresh suit unless expressly imposed; payment within time fixed or extended by court validates suit's institution.

Parties
Appellant: Konkan Trading Company; Respondents: Suresh Govind Kamai Tarkar & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
04 April 1986
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Bombay High Court Panaji Bench's Revision Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Withdrawal of Suit, Costs, Order XXIII Rule 1(3), Section 148 CPC
Civil Procedure Withdrawal of Suit Costs Order XXIII Rule 1(3) Section 148 CPC

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Konkan Trading Company

Appellant

Suresh Govind Kamai Tarkar & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Bombay High Court Panaji Bench's Revision Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs ordered on withdrawal must be paid before or after institution of fresh suit to maintainability under Order XXIII Rule 1(3) CPC

Ratio Decidendi

The costs ordered on withdrawal under Order XXIII Rule 1(3) CPC did not constitute a condition precedent for filing a fresh suit unless expressly imposed; payment within time fixed or extended by court validates suit's institution.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment of Bombay High Court set aside
  • Order of Trial Court restored