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

1996 Supreme(All) 893

S.K.PHAUJDAR
RAJHANS KHANDSARI UDYOG – Appellant
Versus
CANARA BANK, KIRATPUR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.DAYAL, SVAMI DAYAL, Vishnu Sahai

S. K. PHAUJDAR, J.

( 1 ) ORIGINAL Suit No. 65 of 1988 was filed by Canara Bank against M/s. Rajhans Khandsari Udyog and others for realisation of a sum of Rs. Nine Lakhs and odd (Rs. 10 lakhs approximately) with interest etc. and in case of default in payment for sale of the properties mortgaged for secured the loan.

( 2 ) ON 3-4-1989 when the suit was called out the plaintiff was present. The defendant was absent and had not, till that date, filed any written statement although by an order dated 24-3-1989 they were directed to file the written statement on 3-4-1989 in terms of a prayer made by them. The Court, accordingly, decided to proceed under Order 8 Rule 10 CPC and it decreed the suit under the said provisions.

( 3 ) SUBSEQUENTLY, the defendants came up with an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC for setting aside the ex parte decree. Both the parties were heard on this application and by an order dated 29-9-1995 the learned trial Court allowed the application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC on condition that within 15 days from the date of the order the defendants were to deposit 25 per cent of the sum under demand in the suit, amounting to Rs. 2,45,250. 00, and to file written








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