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

1961 Supreme(All) 130

MITHAN LAL
RAMESHWAR PD. – Appellant
Versus
RAJASTHAN GOVERNMENT – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
M.L.Hajela, S.B.L.GAUR

MITHAN LAL, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision filed by the defendant arises out of an appellate Order refusing to restore the case.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff brought a suit for ejectment and arrears of rent and after number of adjournments the case was fixed for 20th July, 1956 for final hearing. On that date the defendant filed an application for adjournment on the ground of illness. This application was partly granted inasmuch as the defendant was given time till the 24th of July, 1956, for production of his evidence while the plaintiffs evidence was ordered to be recorded that very day. The defendants counsel wanted time to prepare the case for cross examination of the plaintiffs witnesses till after lunch. That time was also granted. When the case was taken up after lunch the defendant counsel stated that he had no instructions. After recording plaintiffs evidence the case was adjourned to 24th July, 1956 for judgment but even on that date the defendant failed to appear. The case was decided on merits. An application for restoration which was made on 23rd August, 1956, has been dismissed by both the Courts below holding that the suit had been decided under order 17, Rule 3 Civil Procedure Code
















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