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

1997 Supreme(All) 648

A.S.GILL
MOHAMMAD NASEM – Appellant
Versus
THIRD ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, FAIZABAD – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
H.V.SHARMA, S.K.MEHROTRA, S.K.SRIVASTAV

AMAR BIR SINGH GILL, J.

( 1 ) THIS judgment shall dispose of both the writ petitions, as common question of law is involved. The short question which requires decision in these two writ petitions is the application of proviso to Section 17 (1) of Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887.

( 2 ) IN writ petition No. 2801 (R/c) of 1983 an ex parte decree dated 17-3-81 passed by the Judge small cause courts, Faizabad for ejectment of the petitioner as also for arrears of rent with costs and pendentelite and future damages on payment of requisite court fees is in dispute. The petitioner filed an application for setting aside the ex parte decree on 2-7-81 and also depositedthe decretal amount. He, however, deposited costs etc. subsequently on 3-9-81. Objections to the tender were filed by the decree holder. The Judge Small Cause Courts vide judgment dated 22-9-82, copy of which is Annexure-5, relying upon proviso to Section 17 of the Act dismissed the application for setting aside the ex parte decree petitioner filed revision, which also met with the same fate and was dismissed on 16-5-83, copy of judgment is Annexure-4.


( 3 ) IN writ petition No. 5077 (R/c) of 1981 the facts are somewhat










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