Back
ARUN MONGA
Major Singh – Appellant
Versus
Prem Kumar Rattan – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Arun Monga, J. (Oral)
Petition herein is for setting aside order dated 15.12.2017 (Annexure P-4) passed by Ld. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Sangrur affirmed in appeal by the Ld. Additional District Judge, Sangrur vide order dated 09.01.2019 (Annexure P-5), whereby the application of Petitioner/defendant under Order 9, Rule 13 CPC, for setting aside ex-parte judgment and decree dated 12.04.2012 (Annexure P-1) passed in Civil Suit No.68 of 21.05.2009, was dismissed.
2. Brief facts as pleaded in the petition are that the case relates to the rivalry of two employees of Cooperative Department. Petitioner is Manager of Cooperative Bank in Sangrur District, while Respondent was an Auditor. Respondent filed a suit for recovery of Rs.5 lakh as damages against the Petitioner for alleged defamation suffered by him due to the complaints made by Petitioner, which were ultimately filed or withdrawn by Petitioner. Respondent maneuvered the proceedings of purported service of Petitioner in the civil suit and without the knowledge of Petitioner, obtained the ex-parte judgment and decree dated 12.04.2012. In fact, Petitioner was aggrieved because Respondent made false allegations for which false
Negligence and lack of compelling reasons for absence in court proceedings justify the denial of applications to set aside ex-parte judgments under Order IX Rule 13 of the CPC.
An application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC requires compelling reasons for absence; mere negligence does not justify setting aside an ex-parte decree.
Order V Rule 19 of CPC, mandates that before declaring fact that summons have been duly served, it was obligatory for this Court to examine Process Server, on oath, as requisite affidavit has not bee....
An ex-parte decree can only be set aside if the defendant proves that summons was not duly served or that there was sufficient cause for their absence. The burden of proof lies with the defendant to ....
Service of summons via email and WhatsApp is deemed valid under the Code of Civil Procedure when proof exists, and delay due to negligence in responding to litigation cannot be condoned in commercial....
The Trial Court's decision in favor of the plaintiffs/respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and against the appellant without ensuring notice to the appellant and/or his counsel had been effected was in violation ....
The failure to file an application for condonation of delay when seeking to set aside an ex parte decree under Order IX Rule 13 CPC is a fatal procedural defect, leading to dismissal of the applicati....
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
