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

2007 Supreme(Mad) 1963

S.ASHOK KUMAR
K. M. Palanisamy – Appellant
Versus
P. Sengottaiyan – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:P. Valliappan, Advocate. For the Respondent: ----

Judgment :

1. Aggrieved over the fair and decreetal order of the Subordinate Judges Court at Bhavani dated 4. 2007 in I.A. No.45 of 2007 in O.S. No.84 of 2005, this Civil Revision Petition is filed.

2. Brief facts of the case are as follows:

The petitioner is the defendant in O.S. No.84 of 2005 pending on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Bhavani, filed by the respondent herein. The petitioner has filed an Application I.A. No.85 of 2007 under Order 9, Rule 7, C.P.C. to set aside the ex parte order dated 21. 2007 and decide the Suit on merits. It was contested by the respondent by filing a counter affidavit.

3. After contest the learned Subordinate Judge, Bhavani passed an order directing the petitioner to deposit Rs.50,000/- into Court deposit on or before 6. 2007.

4. Aggrieved by the said order, this Civil Revision Petition is filed.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that it was only the first occasion on which the petitioner was set ex parte and within ten days there from he sought for setting aside the ex parte order, that the order directing the petitioner to deposit Rs.50,000/- is very harsh and draconian. The learned counsel appearing for th










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