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

1992 Supreme(Pat) 321

AFTAB ALAM, SACHCHIDANAND JHA
Firoz Khan – Appellant
Versus
Bibi Hasina Khanam – Respondent


Judgment

1. In a suit instituted in 1970 protracting for about nine years with both the plaintiffs and the court hopefully but vainly waiting for the defendants to appear and contest the suit, an ex parte decree was ultimately passed on 13-1-1979. Appellant No. 1 joined by his three brothers attempted to get the decree set aside by an application under Order 9, Rule 13, Civil Procedure Code (in short the Code). Having failed, he along with the two non-applicants has filed this miscellaneous appeal.

2. The suit was instituted by one Deoki Singh for self and as guradian of his minor daughter for partition against his Sita Ram Singh, defendant No. 1 in the suit, on the plea that Sita had fallen in bad company, become wayward and was squandering away property. The plaintiffs impleaded Ful Kuutari Devi, Deokis wife, as proforma defendant 2nd party and the transferees as proforma defendants 3rd party. Some other transferees from Sita Ram,, including the applicants/ appellants were added as proforma defendants later, some of them were transferees prior to the institution of the suit while others transferees pendent lite. On the death of Deoki Singh Ful Kumari Devi was transposed as plainti
















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