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

2018 Supreme(P&H) 1704

B.S.WALIA
Greater Ludhiana Area Development Authority – Appellant
Versus
Gurdeep Singh – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

B.S. WALIA, J.

CM No.16606-CII of 2018

For the reasons as are mentioned in the application, the same is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

CR No.5103 of 2018

1. Learned counsel contends that order Annexure P-1, dated 02.05.2018 striking off defence of the petitioners on account of non-filing of reply as well as payment of costs was on account of counsel representing the petitioners before the learned Additional District Judge, Ludhiana neither informing of requirement to file reply as also to pay costs, therefore, the petitioners are entitled to seek modification/recall of order as well as enlargement of time u/s 151 read with Section 148, Code of Civil Procedure in view of the decision of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Saleem Advocate Bar Association Tamilnadu vs. Union of India AIR 2005 Supreme Court 3353 as well as decision of this Court in Municipal Committee Kharkhoda vs. Bhim Singh 1987 (1) RCR (Rent) 442.

Learned counsel further states that the petitioner has also taken appropriate action against the counsel.

2. Whatever circumstances led to non filing of reply and failure to pay costs on the date fixed, were not brought to the notice of the learned Additional Distri





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