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

1953 Supreme(All) 143

B.M.LAL
JAGDISH PRASAD – Appellant
Versus
MAHADEO – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
J.J.CHATTERJEE

BRIJ MOHAN LALL, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application in revision by the defendants under Section 25, Small Cause Courts Act.

( 2 ) AN ex parte decree was passed against the applicants on 24-10-52, On 7-11-52 they presented an application under Order 9, Rule 13, C. P. C. for setting aside the said decree. On the same day, they presented an application seeking the courts permission to file security of an immovable property. Permission was given to them to file a security bond hypothecating immovable property. On 21-11-52 they presented an unregistered security bond. They asked for one months extension so that they might get the bond registered. The bond was returned to them on 24-11-52 and they presented the bond, duly registered, on 8-12-52.

( 3 ) WHEN the application for setting aside the ex parte decree came up for hearing before the learned Judge the decree-holder raised a contention that the requirements of Section 17 of the provincial Small Cause Courts Act had not been compiled with. This section requires that before presenting an application for setting aside an ex parte decree the applicant should seek the direction of the court as to the nature of security he has to furnish and





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