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

1987 Supreme(Ker) 340

BALAKRISHNA MENON, SHAMSUDDIN
MANICK PETER – Appellant
Versus
SURENDRANATHAN – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. This appeal by the defendants is against the dismissal of their application to set aside the exparte decree passed in the suit. The suit is for recovery of Rs. 32,000/ with interest on the basis of six promissory notes executed by the defendants in favour of the plaintiff. The defendants were duly served with summons in the suit. All the defendants entered appearance on 29-6-1984. No written statement was filed on 6-7-1984 the date fixed for the first hearing of the suit as required by 0.8 R.1 CPC. The defendants applied for time for filing written statement and the court on 6-7-1984 granted them time till 6-8-1984. The defendants on 6-8-1984 prayed for further time and the court granted time till 19-9-1984 for the defendants to file their written statement. The case was posted to 19-9-1984. No written statement filed even on 19-9-1984. The defendants and their counsel were absent and the court on the same day pronounced judgment under 0.8 R.10 CPC decreeing the suit as prayed for on the basis of Exts. Al to A8 marked and proved by affidavit of the plaintiff.

2. An application to set aside the exparte decree was filed on 25-9-1984 supported by an affidavit by the coun









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