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

1996 Supreme(AP) 1225

T.RANGA RAO
Devineni Durgamba – Appellant
Versus
Raj Kumar Financiers, rep. by its Managing Partner – Respondent


T. RANGA RAO, J.

( 1 ) ). THIS appeal is filed against the orders dated 30-6-1994 in EA No. 489/1993 in EP No. 32/87 in O. S. No. 587/1983 on the file of the Principal Subordinate judge, Tenali. That was a petition filed under Order 21 Rule 106 and Sec. 151 c. P. C. requesting to set aside the dismissal order dated 12-8-1993 in EA. No. 291/1991 and restore the same.

( 2 ) ). It appears that the properties of the appellant herein Devineni Durgamba were sold in court auction on 4-4-1991 in execution of the decree in EP. No. 32/87 and the appellant herein filed application in E. A. No. 291/91 under order 21 Rule 89 CPC seeking to set aside the sale and the said petition was dismissed for default on 12-8-93. The appellant filed EA No. 489/93 seeking to set aside the default order and restoration of EA No. 291/91 and the said petition was dismissed on 30-6-1994.

( 3 ) AGGRIEVED by the said order, the appellant filed this Civil Miscellaneous appeal.

( 4 ) ). On the grounds urged before me, the point that arises for consideration is whether the impugned order is unsustainable in law?

( 5 ) THE learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the petitioner s counsel was present and ready fo





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