Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
MADHAV J. JAMDAR
Mediwal Nagendra Dastgi – Appellant
Versus
Kshtriya Dnyati Sabha – Respondent
JUDGMENT:
MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
1. Heard Mr. Thorat, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners and Ms. Sahoo, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1.
2. The challenge in this Writ Petition is to the Judgment and Order dated 6th May 2016 passed by the learned Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court, Mumbai in Misc. Appeal No.130 of 2014 in MARJI Application No.809 of 2013 and the Judgment and Order dated 25th February 2014 passed by the learned Judge, Small Causes Court, Mumbai in MARJI Application No.809 of 2013 in R.A.E. Suit No.3590 of 1990.
3. The learned Trial Court decreed the said Suit filed by the Respondents by Judgment and Decree dated 20th December 2012. The Petitioner filed Marji Application No.809 of 2013 seeking setting aside the Judgment and Decree dated 20th December 2012 on the ground that the decree passed is ex parte decree. The learned Trial Court dismissed the said Marji Application by Order dated 25th February 2014 inter alia on the ground that said Judgment and Decree dated 20th December 2012 is not an ex- parte decree but decree passed under Order XVII, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”). The said Order of learned Trial Court is c
The service of notice to any adult family member, including a female, is valid despite local amendments restricting it to male members, thus upholding the decree passed. Refusal to appear without suf....
Proper service of notice is essential for ex parte decrees; without sufficient evidence of notification, such decrees can be set aside under natural justice principles.
The High Court, exercising its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, cannot reappreciate the evidence or substitute its subjective opinion in place of the finding....
The court emphasized that procedural rules should not lead to dismissal of a suit when the defendant has knowledge of the proceedings, allowing for restoration of the suit.
The court upheld the trial court's discretion in rejecting the application to restore a suit dismissed for default, finding no sufficient cause for the appellants' absence during proceedings.
Ex parte decree not set aside for uncorroborated delay excuse despite missing defendant claim; prior knowledge inferred from admissions; Art 227 bars reappreciating evidence in absence of jurisdictio....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
