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

DESH BANDHU AGGARWAL, S.BRAR, A.P.CHOWDHRI
K. K. SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
S. D. SHARMA – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant :Mr. Virender Bhatt, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Vivek Srivastava, Advocate.

ORDER

Mr. Justice A.P. Chowdhri, President— This order would dispose of appeals A-372 and A-401 of 1994, as common question of law has been raised therein. In various complaints detailed in the order of the District Forum, the opposite parties failed to appear and were proceeded ex-parte. The complaints were disposed of ex-parte. On behalf of the opposite parties, applications for setting aside the ex- parte order were moved. The same were contested : The various applications were dismissed by the District Forum by its order dated 16.8.94 on the ground that the District Forum had no power to set-aside the final order passed. Aggrieved by the order, both these appeals have been filed.

2. We have heard Mr. Virender Bhatt, Advocate, for the appellant’s and Mr. Vivek Srivastava, Advocate for the respondent’s.

3. It would be convenient to notice the facts in appeal No. A. 401/94, The complaint was instituted in the District Forum in 1992. The opposite party failed to appear and the complaint was allowed by order dated 27.4.92. An application for setting aside the ex-parte order was made before the District Forum on 29.10.92. The main ground taken was that no service had been effected in th











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