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

1953 Supreme(Mad) 83

CHANDRA REDDI
James Manickam – Appellant
Versus
Jaya Narayan Daga – Respondent


Advocates:
Subramaniam for Messrs. Jan and San for Petitioner.
V. Krishnaswami for Respondent.

Judgment.-

This revision petition is filed by the defendant against the order of the Principal Judge, City Civil Court, refusing to extend time for leave to appear and defend the suit instituted by the respondent under the summary provisions of Order 37 of the Civil Procedure Code. The suit was laid for the recovery of Rs. 1905 due on a promissory note executed by the defendant for Rs. 6000 on 4th June, 1951. The suit amount was claimed after giving credit for Rs. 4,700 paid by the defendant on various dates subsequent to the execution of the promissory note. Summons was issued in form No. 4 in Appendix B of the Civil Procedure Code, and the defendant was called upon to obtain leave to appear and defend within ten days from the service of the summons, if need be. Although the defendant filed a Vakalat on the 29th January, 1952, he did not make an application for leave to appear and defend the suit. He merely filed a written statement on the 13th March, 1952.

When the suit came on for hearing on that date, the plaintiff asked for a decree as the defendant had not applied for leave to defend the suit. Thereupon the defendant filed an application for permission to defend the suit and al












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