Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, J
Gulshan Kumar S/O Lat Sh. Dharam Chand – Appellant
Versus
Pinky Devi W/O Late Balwant Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Since the impugned order in both the appeals is the same, therefore, this Court proposes to take up both the appeals together for disposal by way of a common order.
2. The present appeals have been preferred by the appellant under Sections 96 of the Civil Procedure Code (for short, “ CPC ” against the order dated 18.09.2023 (hereinafter referred to as the, “impugned order”) passed by the Court of learned Principal District Judge, Kathua (Presiding Officer, MACT Cases), Kathua (hereinafter referred to as the, “MACT, Kathua”), whereby an application for condonation of delay and setting aside ex-parte decree has been dismissed with a prayer for setting aside the same.
3. The appellant through the medium of instant appeals has also sought a relief of setting aside the ex-parte decree dated 14.05.2019 passed in Claim petition Nos. 81/2015 & 82/2015 titled, “Kamlesh Devi and ors. Vs. Raman Kumar and ors.” & “Pinky Devi and ors. Vs. Raman Kumar and ors.” and ex-parte proceedings initiated against him on 18.04.2017.
4. The record reveals that this Court vide order dated 25.11.2024 granted last and final opportunity of two weeks to learned counsel for the appellants in both the ap
The court ruled that appeals against ex-parte decrees must be filed under Order XLIII Rule 1(d) of the CPC, not Section 96, which applies to original decrees.
The court held that a revision under Article 227 is not maintainable when an alternative remedy of appeal is available following the dismissal of an application for condonation of delay under the Lim....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that appeal is a statutory right and must be explicitly provided for in a statute. The judgment also emphasizes the principles governing a suit und....
Once an ex-parte decree is merged with an appellate decree, an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC is not maintainable as per legislative intent.
A regular appeal against an exparte decree under Section 96(2) r/w Order 41 of CPC is maintainable, despite prior dismissal under Order 9 Rule 13, focusing on merits without contradicting earlier fin....
A defendant must demonstrate justifiable reasons for absence to succeed in an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC.
An appeal against an ex-parte injunction is maintainable under Order XLIII Rule 1(r), affirming that the right to appeal is a statutory right.
Setting aside ex-parte decree – Filing of application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC as well as filing of appeal under Section 96(2) of CPC against ex-parte decree are concurrent remedies available to a ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
