Back
ALKA SARIN
Amrit Kaur (since deceased) through LRs – Appellant
Versus
Inderpal Kaur – Respondent
ALKA SARIN, J.
1. The present revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed for setting aside the impugned order dated 10.01.2019 whereby the application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC filed by the defendant-respondents has been allowed.
2. The brief facts relevant to the present lis are that the plaintiff-petitioner filed a suit for joint possession against the defendant-respondents herein who are none-other than the daughter-in-law and grand-children of the plaintiff-petitioner. The defendant-respondents were proceeded against ex-parte and vide judgment and decree dated 03.09.2016 the suit was decreed. The defendant-respondents filed an application for setting aside the ex-parte order dated 28.08.2016 and the ex-parte judgment and decree dated 03.09.2016. The Trial Court vide impugned order dated 10.01.2019 allowed the application and the ex-parte order dated 28.08.2016 as well as the exparte judgment and decree dated 03.09.2016 were set aside and the suit was restored to its original number. Hence, the present revision petition. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiff-petitioner would contend that as far as the minors are concerned,
The application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC was maintainable on behalf of the minors, as the defendant-respondents were not properly served with the summons.
The different scopes of proceedings under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC and Section 96(2) of CPC, and the principle of estoppel in challenging the withdrawal of an application.
The legal point established is that the process server's reports must be witnessed, and the court must record satisfaction of 'deemed' service. The petitioner should have been given an opportunity to....
Timely filing and valid explanations for delays are crucial in applications to set aside ex parte judgments under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC.
A defendant must demonstrate justifiable reasons for absence to succeed in an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC.
The limitation for filing an application under Order 9, Rule 13 CPC starts from the date of the decree, and failure to provide a valid explanation for delay results in dismissal.
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
