RAGHUNATH DASS versus UNION OF IJLIDIA AND ANR.

RAGHUNATH DASS versus UNION OF IJLIDIA AND ANR.

A notice under section 80 CPC issued under a trade name by the sole proprietor, expressly signed as proprietor, is valid, and the suit is maintainable since there is no confusion as to identity.

Parties
Appellant: Raghunath Dass; Respondent: Union of India; Respondent: S. fr. Nayar
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
26 July 1968
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Decree of the Allahabad High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Notice Under Section 80 of Civil Procedure Code, Maintainability of Suit by Sole Proprietor, Trade Name and Identity of Plaintiff
Civil Procedure Notice Under Section 80 of Civil Procedure Code Maintainability of Suit by Sole Proprietor Trade Name and Identity of Plaintiff

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

Parties

Raghunath Dass

Appellant

Union of India

Respondent

S. fr. Nayar

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Decree of the Allahabad High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the notice under section 80 Civil Procedure Code served by the sole proprietor under the trade name satisfies the statutory requirements
  2. 2 Whether the suit is maintainable where notice and plaint are under different names

Ratio Decidendi

A notice under section 80 CPC issued under a trade name by the sole proprietor, expressly signed as proprietor, is valid, and the suit is maintainable since there is no confusion as to identity.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment of the High Court set aside
  • Judgment and decree of the trial court restored