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

1994 Supreme(AP) 46

S.PARVATHA RAO
Gopal and Co. , V. K. Soni and Durga Prasad Soni – Appellant
Versus
Kure Balarajaiah Siddiramulu, a firm rep. , by its Managing Partner, K. Siddiramulu – Respondent


S. PARVATHA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant is the defendant is O. S. No,21 of 1984 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge s Court at Nizamabad and the respondent is the plaintiff who instituted the said suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 59, 318-83 ps. with costs and future interest. That suit was decreed ex parte on 26-12-1988 as the defendant and his counsel were called absent. The defendant preferred I. A. No. 78 of 1989 under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Code for setting aside the paid exparte decreeof 26-12-1988. The learned Subordinate Judge, after hearing both sides, by his order dated 18-7-1989 set aside the ex parte decree on condition that the defendant should deposit half of the decretal amount and costs on or before 1-8-1989 and that "in case of failure to deposit on or before the said date", the LA. would stand dismissed.

( 2 ) THE defendant approached this Court on 18-7-1989 by way of Civil. Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1109 of 1989. That C. M. A. was admitted on28-7-1989 and on the same day in C. M. P. No,10140 of 1989 this Court granted interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the said ex parte decree dated 26-12-1988 subject to the condition of hi

















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