M/S KABARI PVT. LTD. versus SHIVNATH SHROFF AND ORS.

M/S KABARI PVT. LTD. versus SHIVNATH SHROFF AND ORS.

The Court held the plaintiffs failed and neglected to take proper steps to effect the amendment essential for relief, were aware of their solicitors' laches yet were not diligent or timely in changing solicitors, and that the review applications (filed on false or fabricated premises and after SLPs) deserved dismissal; accordingly the High Court order allowing review petitions was set aside and the appeals allowed.

Parties
Appellant: Mis Kabari Pvt. Ltd.; Respondents: Shivnath Shroff & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
01 December 1995
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (special Leave Petition) / Appeal From High Court Order Allowing Review Petitions
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order allowing review applications set aside
Legal Topics
Laches and Negligence, Specific Performance, Order 47 Rule 1 CPC, Article 136, Review, Urban Land Ceiling Act
Civil Procedure Property Law Constitutional Law Laches and Negligence Specific Performance Order 47 Rule 1 CPC Article 136 Review +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mis Kabari Pvt. Ltd.

Appellant

Shivnath Shroff & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (special Leave Petition) / Appeal From High Court Order Allowing Review Petitions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiffs' laches and failure to effect amendments barred relief
  2. 2 Whether review applications filed in High Court while SLPs were pending (and not disclosed) were maintainable
  3. 3 Whether Order 47 Rule 1 CPC phrase 'from which an appeal is allowed' should be construed to include special leave petitions under Article 136

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held the plaintiffs failed and neglected to take proper steps to effect the amendment essential for relief, were aware of their solicitors' laches yet were not diligent or timely in changing solicitors, and that the review applications (filed on false or fabricated premises and after SLPs) deserved dismissal; accordingly the High Court order allowing review petitions was set aside and the appeals allowed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order allowing review applications set aside

Orders

  • Impugned High Court order dated 18 March 1994 allowing review applications set aside
  • Appeals allowed