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

1991 Supreme(Guj) 32

J.M.PANCHAL
GUNVANTLAL MANEKCHAND – Appellant
Versus
ATUL KUMAR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: B.K.DAMANI, V.J.DESAI

PANCHAL, J.

( 1 ) THE respondent who is original plaintiff had filed Summary suit No. 4757 of 1982 in the Small Causes Court at Ahmedabad for the purpose of recovering an amount of Rs. 1,726. 50 from the petitioner who was original defendant in that suit. The learned Judge decreed the suit by judgment and order dated 19/06/1984. Therefore, an application against the order dated 28-3-1985 passed by the Appellate Bench. Small Cause Court, ahmedabad rejecting an application to set aside the judgment and decree passed by a Judge of that Court. for new trial under Sec. 38 of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, 1882 was filed by the present petitioner before the Appellate Bench of the Small causes Court with a prayer to set aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned Judge and to hold a fresh trial. The said application was filed on 3/07/1984 and was registered as New Trial Application No. 23 of 1984. The Appellate Bench relied on the case of E. C. Pareira v. Somani and Co. Ltd. , 60 BLR 1369 and came to the conclusion that a period of limitation for filing an application under Sec. 38 is governed by Sec. 38 itself and no power is given either under the Limitation Act or under







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