RAMESH CHANDER Vs. RAKESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE substantial question of law involved tn these civil second appeals is; whether in terms of Order 2 Rule 2 CPC, subsequent suits would be barred despite the averments made by the plaintiffs in their previous suits to the effect that "the plaintiff however reserves his right to file a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction/ possession or specific performance as the case may be for the possession of the shop in reference simultaneously or even subsequently. "

(2.) ORDER 2 Rule 2 C. P. C. reads as under:-

(3.) FROM the bare reading of the above rule, it is manifest that where a person is entitled to more than one relief in respect of the same cause of action, as a general rule he has to sue for all reliefs available, and if he omits to sue for any of such relief he cannot be permitted to sue afterwards for such omitted reliefs. This. general rule is, however, subject to the exception that he may sue for the omitted reliefs afterwards, if he has been granted leave by the Court therefor.