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

2001 Supreme(Del) 1317

VIKRAMAJIT SEN
VIRENDER KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
MAYA DEVI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Ajant Kumar, DIPAK KHADARIA

VIKRAMAJIT SEN

( 1 ) BY this Order I shall dispose off an application filed by the Petitioner under Order XLI Rule 19 read with Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code. The Civil Revision was dismissed for non-prosecution on 7/9/2000, since there was no appearance on behalf of Petitioner. It is averred that "the non-appearance on behalf of the petitioner is UN-intentional and bona fide as the counsel for the Petitioner could not check the Cause list of 7/9/2000 of the regular Matters". " This application-has been supported by" the affidavit of the applicant in which he has deposed as follows:

"1. That I am the petitioner in the above noted case, conversant with the facts of the case, am competent and authorized to swear this affidavit. 2. That the contents of the accompanying application , under order XL I Rule 19 read with Section 151 Civil Procedure Code for recalling the order dated 7/9/2000 has been drafted under my instruction and the same are true and correct to my knowledge and I state that the same may be read as part and parcel of this affidavit to avoid repetition. "

( 2 ) SINCE the reason given for the non-appearance on the crucial date is relatable to the Counsel for the peti







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