SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(AP) 754

V.V.S.RAO
Boddupally China Venkanna – Appellant
Versus
Edulla Narayana Reddy – Respondent


( 1 ) THE defendants in O. S. No. 34 of 1999 on the file of the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, devarakonda, are the petitioners in this revision petition. The respondent-plaintiff filed the suit for perpetual injunction restraining the defendants in respect of the land admeasuring 0. 37 gts. comprised in sy. No. 455 of Mondikanigudem village, hamlet of Palvai village of Gurrampode mandal, Nalgonda District. The suit was decreed on 7-9-2000. The petitioners filed an application under Order IX Rule 13 seeking to set aside the ex parte decree. As there was a delay in filing the said application, they also filed I. A. No. 148 of 2001 praying the lower Court to condone the delay of 331 days in filing the application to set aside the ex parte decree. The trial Court having dismissed I. A. No. 148 of 2001, the petitioners filed the present revision petition under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ( the Code ).

( 2 ) THE trial Court having regard to the pleadings as well as contentions in LA. No. 148 of 2001, dismissed the LA. holding thus: a perusal of the affidavit of the petitioners clearly indicates that the petitioners did not assign any ground for the delay in filin









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top