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

2025 Supreme(RAJ) 1083

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA, J
JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – Appellant
Versus
M/S RAJENDRA SINGH BHAMBU INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED – Respondent
CW / 1937 / 2025



Advocates:
Mr. Yuvraj Samant, Adv.

The court emphasized the importance of allowing defendants a fair opportunity to present their case, setting aside ex-parte proceedings upon payment of costs.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 227 - Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 9 Rule 7 - Writ petition filed against the order declining to set aside ex-parte proceedings initiated against defendants - Defendants unable to appear due to unavoidable reasons - Petition allowed upon payment of costs, setting aside the impugned orders and permitting defendants to file written statement. (Paras 1-6)

(B) Ex-parte Proceedings - Legal principles regarding the setting aside of ex-parte proceedings discussed - The court emphasizes the need for justice and fair opportunity for defendants to present their case. (Paras 4-5)

Facts of the case:
The defendants filed a writ petition against the order passed by the Commercial Court, which had initiated ex-parte proceedings due to their non-appearance. The defendants sought to set aside these proceedings, citing unavoidable circumstances for their absence. (Paras 1-3)

Findings of Court:
The court found it just to allow the defendants to file their written statement, setting aside previous orders upon the condition of cost payment. (Paras 5-6)

Issues: The main issue was whether the defendants should be given another opportunity to file their written statement after ex-parte proceedings were initiated. (Paras 4-5)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that defendants should be given a fair chance to present their case, emphasizing justice in procedural matters and the necessity of allowing parties to defend themselves. (Paras 5-6)

Result: Petition allowed.

Order :

1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners-defendants (for short, 'the defendants') under Article 227 of the Constitution of India aggrieved by the order dated 18.07.2024 passed by the Commercial Court No.1, Jaipur Metropolitan-II in Civil Suit No.481/2022 titled as “Dr. Rajendra Singh Bhambu Infra Private Limited Vs. J.D.A. & Ors.”, whereby the defendant’s prayer for setting aside the ex-parte proceedings initiated against them vide order dated 10.02.2023 passed by the trial court has been declined.

2. Learned counsel for the defendants submits that the plaintiff-respondent (for short ‘the plaintiff’) filed a suit for recovery against the defendants in which service of the defendants was deemed to have been affected.

3. Learned counsel for the defendants further submits that due to unavoidable reasons, defendants could not appear before the trial court. Resultantly, the trial court vide order dated 10.02.2023 initiated ex-parte proceedings against them.

4. Learned counsel for the defendants also submits that on 07.03.2024 the defendants filed an application under Order 9 Rule 7 read with Section 151 CPC for setting aside the ex-parte proceedings initiated against them but the trial court vide order dated 18.07.2024 rejected the prayer made by the defendants. So, in the interest of justice, the 10.02.2023 and 18.07.2024 passed by the trial court be set-aside and one more opportunity be given to the defendants to file their written statement before the trial court.

5. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the defendants and perused the impugned orders. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the present case, I deem it just and proper to allow the petition filed by the defendants on cost of Rs.25,000/-.

6. Accordingly, the orders dated 18.07.2024 and 10.02.2023 passed by the trial court are set-aside. The trial court is directed to permit the defendants to file their written statement subject to deposition of cost of Rs.25,000/- by them in the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jaipur on or before next date of hearing failing which no opportunity shall be granted by the trial Court to the defendants to file their written statement.

7. In view of the fact that the application under Order 9 Rule 7 CPC for setting aside the ex-parte proceedings was filed after a delay of more than one year, defendants are directed to initiate the disciplinary proceedings against the concerned officials for their negligence and callousness approach and recover the amount of cost from them. The defendants are also directed to submit the report in this regard before this court on 10.03.2025.

8. List on 10.03.2025.

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 Back to top