PANNALAL versus STATE OF BOMBAY AND ORS.

PANNALAL versus STATE OF BOMBAY AND ORS.

The appellate court's powers under Order 41 Rule 33 are wide, allowing it to grant relief to respondents even where no cross-objection has been filed, but Order 41 Rule 22 generally limits cross-objection relief to cases against appellant unless circumstances require otherwise. The High Court erred in refusing to...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Pannalal; Respondent: State of Bombay; Respondent: Gondia Municipal Committee; Respondent: Deputy Commissioner of Bhandara (Mr. G. K. Tiwari); Respondent: Dispensary Funds Committee and members
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
11 February 1963
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Bombay High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; case remanded
Legal Topics
Appeals, Order 41 Rule 33, Cross Objections, Decrees, Liability of State Government
Civil Procedure Appeals Order 41 Rule 33 Cross Objections Decrees Liability of State Government

Source-derived case record

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pannalal

Appellant

State of Bombay

Respondent

Gondia Municipal Committee

Respondent

Deputy Commissioner of Bhandara (Mr. G. K. Tiwari)

Respondent

Dispensary Funds Committee and members

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Bombay High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether State Government is liable for contracts entered by Deputy Commissioner
  2. 2 Whether relief can be granted against other respondents under Order 41 Rule 33 in absence of cross-objection

Ratio Decidendi

The appellate court's powers under Order 41 Rule 33 are wide, allowing it to grant relief to respondents even where no cross-objection has been filed, but Order 41 Rule 22 generally limits cross-objection relief to cases against appellant unless circumstances require otherwise. The High Court erred in refusing to grant relief under Order 41 Rule 33 based on incorrect assumptions about Order 41 Rule 22.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; case remanded

Orders

  • Dismissal of suits against State of Bombay maintained
  • Order of dismissal of suits against other defendants set aside