GURBIR SINGH
Islamuddin – Appellant
Versus
Dharambir – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mr. Gurbir Singh, J.
Challenge in the present revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is to the order dated 02.11.2016 (Annexure P-5), passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Gurgaon (for brevity - Trial Court), against dismissal of application under section 151 CPC, filed by the plaintiff/petitioner, for restoration of the suit filed by him.
2. Petitioner Islamuddin was plaintiff and respondents Dharambir etc. were defendants before the learned Trial Court. Both the parties hereinafter shall be addressed to as per their original status in the suit.
3. The facts, as culled out from the paper-book and necessary for proper adjudication of this revision petition, are that plaintiff filed a Civil Suit No. 120 dated 26.07.2004 titled Islamuddin v. Dharambir Singh and another for decree of possession by way of specific performance of agreement to sell dated 10.06.2003 and in the alternative, for recovery of amount of Rs. 16,20,000/- along with interest etc., with regard to the land measuring 23 kanals 17 marlas @ Rs. 5,40,000/- per acre, out of which earnest money of Rs. 3,20,000/- was paid.
4. During pendency of the said suit, parties ente
M/s Aravali Stone Company v. Urban Imrpovement Trust 2003 (3) CivCC 342
Manohar Lal Chopra v. Rai Bahadur Rao Raja Seth Hiralal AIR 1962 SC 527
Ram Prakash Agarwal v. Gopi Krishan (Dead through LRs) (2013) 11 SCC 296
Inherent powers under Section 151 CPC allow restoration of suits for substantial justice without a formal application for condonation of delay.
Litigants are not penalized for their Advocate's negligence; restoration of a suit can be granted based on demonstrated sufficient cause for non-appearance.
Point of Law - It is axiomatic that condonation of delay is a matter of discretion of court Section 5 of Limitation Act does not say that such discretion can be exercised only if the delay is within ....
Judicial discretion to condone delays must favor adjudication on merits, particularly where substantive efforts have been made by the litigant.
Setting aside ex-parte decree – Courts should not shut out cases on mere technicalities but rather afford opportunity to both sides and thrash out matter on merits – Court cannot let the party suffer....
Restoration of Special Civil Suit – Entertaining application filed at behest of a stranger for condonation of delay in filing application for restoration of subject suit is totally unsustainable in l....
The court upheld the trial court's restoration of a suit despite procedural missteps, emphasizing that implicit condonation of delay suffices for legal validity.
Dismissals of suits in default should be exceptions; courts must examine merits before dismissing applications for restoration.
The court upheld the trial court's refusal to condone the 406-day delay in restoring the suit due to the absence of sufficient cause and credibility issues regarding the plaintiff's claims.
A party should not be denied relief due to procedural missteps, especially when genuine misunderstanding exists concerning court dates and the case is at an early stage.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.