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

2003 Supreme(Ker) 503

PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN
K. P. Jayakumar – Appellant
Versus
K. Ravindran – Respondent


Advocates:
T. P. Pankajakshan, for Appellant.

Judgement

RADHAKRISHNAN, J. :- This appeal has been preferred under Order 43, Rule 1(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure against the order in IA. 312/03 in I.P. No. 2/99 of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Tellicherry, Registry expressed doubt as to whether the appeal is maintainable. Consequently returned the appeal memorandum. Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that since the impugned order comes under Order 43, Rule 1(c) FAO is maintainable before this Court. Registry again returned the appeal noting the following defects :

"FAO filed against the order passed in petition filed for restoration of the insolvency petition dismissed for default."

On a request made by the counsel matter has been placed before us to decide the question as to whether this appeal would fall under Order 43, Rule 1(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

2. Appellant herein preferred a petition under Section 7 of the Provincial Insolvency Act before the Subordinate Judge's Court, Tellicherry to declare him as insolvent. Insolvency petition was posted for evidence on 25-11-2002. On that day petitioner was absent. Case was adjourned to 28-11-2002. On that day also petitioner remained absent. Consequently that







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