T.CH.SURYA RAO
H. C. Upadhya – Appellant
Versus
A. R. Rustom Fram – Respondent
( 2 ) AT the stage of admission, the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents had taken notice and addressed arguments for the final disposal of the revision petition.
( 3 ) THE revision petitioner is the defendant in the suit. The respondents filed the suit for recovery of possession. The suit was decreed ex parte. The petitioner, therefore, filed I. A. No. 1171 of 2003 seeking to set aside the ex parte decree under order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil procedure (for brevity the Code ). After having heard on either side, the Court below allowed that application on 21-1-2004 on the condition of the petitioner paying a sum of Rs. 1,000/- towards costs within 8 days from the date of that order. On the premise that on account of the sad demise of the grandmother of the petitioner s Counsel, the Counsel could not deposit the amount within the time and that despite the tragedy the Counsel rushed to the Court and offered the amount of Rs. 1,000/- to the Counsel of his adversary
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.