Skip to content

CS Professional · Drafting, Pleadings and Appearances · Pleadings

Ramesh's suit against Latha Ltd was dismissed. Later, a question arises relating to execution of the decree in that suit, and Latha contends that Ramesh is not a 'party' for Section 47 as he lost. Which view is correct under Section 47?

Ramesh is treated as a party. Explanation 1 to Section 47 says a plaintiff whose suit has been dismissed is a party to the suit, so his status does not depend on winning or on having filed an appeal.

  1. ARamesh is not a party since his suit failed
  2. BRamesh is a party, because Explanation 1 treats a plaintiff whose suit has been dismissed as a party to the suitCorrect
  3. CRamesh is a party only if he appealed
  4. DOnly the defendant is a party after dismissal

Explanation

Explanation 1 to Section 47 states that a plaintiff whose suit has been dismissed, and a defendant against whom a suit has been dismissed, are parties to the suit. So Ramesh remains a party for Section 47 purposes, regardless of appeal.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Pleadings shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise PleadingsFree diagnostic mock

More Pleadings questions