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

1997 Supreme(AP) 579

V.BHASKARA RAO
Kalidindi Sri Rama Raju – Appellant
Versus
Maeliraju Satyakala – Respondent


V. BHASKARA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THE revision petitioners are the defendants in OS. No. 80/1990 on the file of subordinate Judge, Bhimavaram. They sought for condonation of delay of 4 years 8 months and 8 days in filing a petition under order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil procedure for setting aside the exparte decree therein. The learned Subordinate Judge dismissed the petition with costs on the ground that there are no bona fides on the part of the petitioners are there is abnormal delay for which no just and reasonable cause is shown by them. Hence, this revision petition.

( 2 ) THE facts leading to this revision petition in brief are that the sole respondent filed O. P. No. 29 of 1989 seeking permission to file the suit as an indigent person and the same was allowed and O. S. No. 80/1990 came to be registered as the suit for declaration of title and delivery of the suit scheduled property bearing RS. No. 1561 admeasuring 3 acres situated at Utlapadu village, bhimavaram Mandal. Summons were issued to the revision petitioners, among whom first petitioner received the same on behalf of himself and the other revision petitioners on 28-7-1-990. The suit was called on 17-8-1990 and as the












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