Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
Harsha Soni – Appellant
Versus
Suraj Bhan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. formal initiation and closure of proceedings. (Para 1 , 11) |
| 2. importance of service of summons in legal proceedings. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. consideration of explanations in applications. (Para 5 , 7) |
| 4. judicial discretion favors substantial justice over technicalities. (Para 6 , 8) |
| 5. setting aside of ex parte orders subject to costs. (Para 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT
Tushar Rao Gedela, J. (ORAL)
[The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid mode]
1. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, petition is taken up for hearing today.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner was never served with the summons of the suit in the year 2017. In the meanwhile, Trial Court vide order dated 06.07.2017 had proceeded the Petitioner ex parte.
3. Learned counsel submits that it was only during the first week of January, 2022 that she was informed about the pendency of the suit by Defendant No.2 and after certain enquiries and inspecting the file, the Petitioner came to know that she was proceeded exparte as far back as on 06.07.2017.
4. Without wasting any time, Petitioner had approached the learned Trial Court with an applicati
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
