Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Monday, 10 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2018-04-13 allowed

Sucha Singh Sodhi (D) Thr. LRs vs Baldev Raj Walia & Anr

Bench: 2 — Abhay Manohar Sapre

In Brief

Sucha Singh filed a suit for permanent injunction against a seller who threatened to evict him from purchased property. Singh later sought to withdraw that suit and file a fresh suit for specific performance of the sale agreement. The defendant objected, claiming this violated Order 2 Rule 2 CPC, which bars claiming relief that could have been claimed in a previous suit. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that permanent injunction and specific performance are separate causes of action governed by different limitation provisions, so the bar did not apply. The plaintiff's statement at withdrawal—coupled with court permission to withdraw—sufficed to allow a fresh suit.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Civil Procedure Limitation Specific Performance Injunctions Res Judicata Order 2 Rule 2 CPC

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login