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

2023 Supreme(P&H) 645

GURBIR SINGH
Sanjay Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Kiran Bala – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Mr. S.K. Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner.
None for the respondents.

GURBIR SINGH, J.

1. Challenge in this revision petition is to order dated 02.08.2018 (Annexure P-1) passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Kaithal, in Civil Appeal No.CA/27/2017 titled as Sanjay Kumar Vs. Kiran Bala and Ors, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed for non-filing of courier charges and copy of grounds of appeal for summoning respondent No.4.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the appeal could not be dismissed under order 9 Rule 2 CPC which is applicable to suits. Procedure for appeals is mentioned in Order XVI of CPC. Earlier there was a provision i.e. Order XVI Rule 18 CPC but said provisions has been omitted by Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1999. He further submits that before the learned trial Court all the defendants were being represented by Mr. B.N. Gupta, Advocate. In the appeal, Mr. B.N. Gupta, Advocate, had been appearing on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2. Respondent No.4 was having knowledge of the case but was not intentionally appearing in the Court.

3. Heard.

4. The impugned orders dated 02.08.2018 are reproduced as under:-

    ‘CNR No.HRKH01-000190-2017 CA/27/2017

Sanjay Kuma

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