#maintainability

The Madras HC set aside a trial court order returning an unnumbered plaint in an adverse possession suit against a TN Land Encroachment Act notice, holding courts must first number the plaint and hear the plaintiff on maintainability under Order VII Rule 11 CPC - a jurisdictional bar cannot justify bypassing this mandatory procedure.

The Bombay High Court ruled that the RERA Appellate Tribunal cannot adjudicate merits when the Regulatory Authority dismissed a complaint on maintainability grounds without a merits hearing. Doing so would deprive parties of their statutory right to first-instance adjudication and a subsequent appeal. The Tribunal must remand the matter to the Authority for fresh merits determination.

The Allahabad HC held a writ under Article 226 for admitted dues maintainable despite state's plea, directing payment of Rs 18,79,197 at 6% interest within three months and affirming that financial constraints cannot override a settled legal obligation.

SC barred a specific performance suit on an oral land sale agreement, holding no contract and the claim omitted in a prior suit without leave. Order II Rule 2 CPC requires leave to add omitted relief, affecting oral property litigants.

The Orissa HC held that Articles 226/227 writs lie against orders under Section 37(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, overruling the second-appeal bar. This preserves the court’s supervisory jurisdiction and restores a remedy for parties challenging interim arbitration orders.

The Calcutta HC ruled that a separate suit to set aside a consent decree under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC is not maintainable; only the court that recorded the decree can decide its validity. This bars parallel litigation and upholds the sanctity of settlement agreements.

Kerala High Court ruled that disputed factual questions in contractual disputes cannot be adjudicated via writ jurisdiction under Article 226, directing the petitioner to pursue civil suit remedies instead. The decision reaffirms the limited scope of writ jurisdiction in commercial contract enforcement cases.

Allahabad High Court dismisses habeas corpus petition as non-maintainable once trial commences, relying on precedent in Neeraj v. State of U.P.

Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench rules that an application under the Senior Citizens Act, 2007 remains maintainable even without an explicit prayer for maintenance. The appellate authority must decide the case on merits rather than dismissing it on procedural grounds, ensuring fair access to welfare relief for senior citizens.

Madras High Court rules that a second criminal revision petition is maintainable under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) if the first was dismissed as withdrawn without adjudication on merits. The court clarifies that res judicata does not apply to criminal proceedings, enabling accused to seek fresh relief.

Madhya Pradesh High Court rules that a counter-claim cannot be maintained against co-defendants in a joint property dispute, emphasizing procedural fairness under the CPC. The case is remanded for fresh determination of maintainability, affecting litigants contesting co-defendant claims in will disputes.

Madhya Pradesh High Court holds that writ appeals cannot be filed against orders passed under Article 226 when the relief sought is akin to Section 482 CrPC quashing of criminal proceedings.