https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215528 On devolution of a corporate plaintiff's interest during pendency of a suit, Order XXII Rule 10 CPC was applied rather than the provisions governing death of a natural person, so the suit did not abate and the applicant could continue it with leave of the Court. The Court held that the alleged extinction of the cause of action could not be finally decided on affidavits in interlocutory proceedings, and the plaint could not then be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Existing interim restraint was continued with modification on a prima facie case and balance of convenience, without granting a broader fresh injunction. en-us Mon, 25 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Aug 2012 18:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215528 On devolution of a corporate plaintiff's interest during pendency of a suit, Order XXII Rule 10 CPC was applied rather than the provisions governing death of a natural person, so the suit did not abate and the applicant could continue it with leave of the Court. The Court held that the alleged extinction of the cause of action could not be finally decided on affidavits in interlocutory proceedings, and the plaint could not then be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Existing interim restraint was continued with modification on a prima facie case and balance of convenience, without granting a broader fresh injunction. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 25 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215528