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

1969 Supreme(AP) 115

PARTHASARATHI
Kotikalapudi Lakshmi – Appellant
Versus
Kotikalapudi Kondala Rao – Respondent


( 1 ) IN O. P. No. 163 of 1967, the Subordinate Judge, Visakhapatnam, made an ex-parle decree for restitution of conjugal rights, on the petition of the respondent against his wife. The decree was made on 15-11-67 and the application to set aside the ex-parte decision was made on 14-3-1968. The application was rejected by the lower Court on the ground that it is statute-barred, it having been presented beyond the period of thirty days allowed by law the lower court held that due process was not lacking in effecting the service of notice of the original petition on the respondent, accordingly, it was of opinion that the period of limitation for having ex-parte decree set aside commenced from the date of the decree itself. The petition was held on that ground to be time barred and it was dismissed in limine The unsuccessful spouse has preferred this appeal.

( 2 ) THE short point for consideration is, whether there was due service of the petition. If the answer is in the affirmative and that was how the lower court answered it, the exparte decree cannot be asked to be set aside on a petition filed beyond the thirty days time allowed by law. On the contrary, if the appellant s submissi











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