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

2002 Supreme(HP) 76

M.R.VERMA
MUNSHI RAM – Appellant
Versus
SURESH KUMAR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Ajay Sharma. Advocate. For the Respondent:Mr. Ashutosh Burathoki. Advocate.

JUDGMENT M.R- Verma, J. (Oral):- This revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereafter referred to as the Code) as directed against the order dated 28.6.2001. whereby the learned Additional district Judge has dismissed the appeal of the petitioner against the order dated 10.5.2000. passed by the learned sub Judge (I), Dharamsala. dismissng the applciaiton of the petitioner under Order 9 Rule 13 of the code for setting aside an ex-parte decree against him.

2. The brief and admitted facts leading to the presentation of the present petition are that respondent institud civil Suit No. 15 of 1992 against the petitioner and for default of appearance of the petitioner, the suit was decreed ex-parte on 29.7.1992. The petitioner moved an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code for setting aside ex-parte decree alongwith an applciaiton under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the application for setting aside ex-parte decree on 22.6.1996. The case of the petitioner, as averred in the applications, is that the summons s issued to him at the address of his native place were not served on him and the report of the Process Server












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