Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
NIDHI GUPTA
Malkit Singh – Appellant
Versus
Mohinder Singh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ex parte orders require adequate notice. (Para 1 , 2 , 4) |
| 2. litigant's absence due to counsel's advice does not fulfill the requirement for setting aside ex parte. (Para 5 , 7 , 11) |
| 3. due diligence in legal representation is critical. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. litigants must show good cause for non-appearance in court. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 5. the petition is summarily dismissed based on lack of merit. (Para 14 , 15) |
JUDGMENT :
Nidhi Gupta, J.
Present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the defendant No.2 for setting aside order dated 11.11.2024 (Annexure P3) passed by learned trial Court vide which the petitioner has been proceeded against ex parte as the counsel for the petitioner pleaded no instructions; and further for setting aside order dated 04.02.2025 (Annexure P6) vide which the learned trial Court dismissed the application filed by the petitioner under Order 9 Rule 7 CPC .
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide order dated 11.11.2024 (Annexure P3), the petitioner was proceeded against ex parte by the learned trial Court as counsel for the petitioner before the learned trial Court had pleaded 'no instructions' from t
Litigants must remain vigilant in their legal representation; absence due to counsel's instruction without good cause does not justify setting aside ex parte orders.
A party seeking to set aside an ex parte judgment and decree must demonstrate sufficient cause for non-appearance and file the application within a reasonable time, as per Order 9 Rule 13 CPC and Sec....
The importance of being present in person before the court and the right to conduct cross-examination despite the absence of counsel.
Each defendant in civil proceedings must fulfill their obligation independently. Persistent negligence cannot justify setting aside an ex parte order.
Litigants should not suffer due to the negligence of their counsel; sufficient cause must be shown to set aside ex-parte decrees.
Defendant set ex parte may cross-examine witnesses to challenge the plaintiff's case but cannot assert factual defenses or participate fully.
The court emphasized the necessity of allowing a defendant to participate in proceedings, ruling that procedural errors in ex-parte judgments violate principles of natural justice.
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
