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

1991 Supreme(All) 759

M.P.SINGH
SURESH CHAND – Appellant
Versus
VII-ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MUZAFFARNAGAR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.K.JAIN, Rishi Ram

M. P. SINGH, J.


( 1 ) THIS is a tenants writ petition. Respondent No. 3 filed a suit for ejectment on the ground of default. Notices were issued to the defendant but he did not put in appearance. The suit proceeded ex parte. Subsequently it was decreed on 14-1-1987.

( 2 ) THE petitioner came to know of the said decree on 27-1-1987. The relevant record was got inspected the same day. He filed an application under O. 9, R. 13, C. P. C. along with an affidavit for setting aside the ex parte decree on 28-1-1987. Thereafter, he moved an application under S. 17 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act (in short the Act) praying that he may be permitted to furnish the personal security.

( 3 ) THE court allowed the application under O. 9, R, 13, C. P. C. on 13-3-1987 holding that there was no personal service on the defendant. The application under S. 17 of the Act was also allowed. The personal security was accepted. The order dated 23-9-1986, to proceed ex parte and ex parte decree dated 14-1-1987 were set aside on payment of cost.

( 4 ) AGAINST the said order the respondent No. 3 filed a revision before the learned District Judge. It was allowed, The orders of the trial court allowing th





















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