D.R.VITHAL RAO, M.N.VENKATACHALIAH
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Appellant
Versus
HEMARAJ ACHALCHAND – Respondent
( 1 ) THIS appeal is by the State of Karnataka and is directed against the decree dated 17. 1. 1974 decreeing respondent-plaintiffs suit for recovery of Rs. 30,110. 35, together with interest and costs, said to be the price of goods supplied to the appellant-defendant.
( 2 ) THE suit stood posted to 17-1-1974 for the appearance of the defendant and settlement of issues. Appellant-defendant was served with the summonses in the suit on 3. 1. 1974. On 17. 1. 1974 defendant failed to appear and the suit was decreed. The note in the order sheet reads: "defendent absent. Placed exparte. Suit decreed as prayed for. "'
( 3 ) THIS appeal requires to be allowed on a short-point. Order VIII Rule 5 (1) C. P. C. provides that any allegation of fact in the plaint, if not denied specifically. or by necessary implication or atleast stated to be not admitted in the pleading of the defendent, shall be taken to be admitted. This provision deals with a case where a written statement is filed but does not "traverse" an allegation of fact either expressly or by necessary implication or does not even stated that the allegation is not admitted. Rule 5 (2), which deals with a. situation w
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.