Case Name : Dr. Shehla Burney & Ors vs Syed Ali Mossa Raza (Dead) by Lrs & Ors Case Reference: (2011) 6 SCC 529 : (2011) 5 SCR 841 Case Number: CA No 6409/2002 Court: Supreme Court Court Bench: 02 Coram: GS Singhvi, Ashok Kumar Ganguly (Author) Date: 21.04.2011
In the amended plaint, prayer was against one defendant. Relief could not be claimed against another defendant.
Defendant’s interest and liability to be shown: Plaint must show that the defendant is or claims to be interest in subject-matter and that he is liable…
Every plaint shall state specifically the relief which plaintiff claims either simply or in the alternative
Sheikh Abdul Kayum vs Mulla Alibhai and Ors, AIR 1963 SC 309
Court does not have jurisdiction to grant relief against defendant against whom no reliefs have been claimed
Scotts Engineering, Bangalore vs Rajesh P Surana, (2008) 4 SCC 256
When relief not claimed against defendant, Court cannot grant relief
Surajmull Nargoremull vs Triton Insurance Co, 1924-25 52 IA 126, 128-29
“…No court can enforce as valid that which competent enactments have declared shall not be valid, nor is obedience to such an enactment a thing from which a court can be dispensed by the consent of the parties, or by a failure to plead or to argue the point at the outset.”
The above (Surajmull) has been approved in
Badri Prasad vs Nagarmal, AIR 1959 SC 559, 562, para 7
Tarini Kamal Pandit vs Prafulla Kumar Chatterjee, AIR 1979 SC 1165, 1172 para 15 : (1979) 3 SCC 280, 288 para 14
“14…As the point raised is a pure question of law and not involving any investigation of the facts, we permitted the learned counsel to raise the question.”
See also: CPC - Order VII rule 5 CPC - Order VII rule 7
PDF: Shehla Burney vs Syed Ali Mossa Raza, (2011) 5 SCR 841.pdf