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

1952 Supreme(All) 24

RAGHUBAR DAYAL
KAVIRAJ RAI – Appellant
Versus
SHEO DARSHAN DASS – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
HARNANDAN PRASAD, S.C.Asthana, S.S.SRIVASTAVA

RAGHUBAR DAYAL, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application in revision against an order of the Civil Judge Basti, re-admitting an appeal against the applicant.

( 2 ) THE appeal was dismissed in default on 16-2-1918. Application for re-admitting it was made on 21-3-1948.

( 3 ) IT was alleged in the application and was supported by an affidavit that the appellant opposite party waited till late in the day on 17-12-1947 to know the next date fixed for the hearing, that no date was fixed and he went away, leaving instructions with his counsels clerk to inform the date to be fixed in the case, that he did not know that the appeal was fixed for hearing on the 16th february and that he learnt about the dismissal of the appeal on 27-3-1946. Ho further alleged in the application that he was told by the clerk, that a post-card had been sent to him communicating the date of hearing, but that he did not receive it. The respondent applicant objected to the re. admission of the appeal, stating in the objection that the reasons mentioned in the application were baseless and that the application was filed beyond time.

( 4 ) THE learned Civil Judge considered the defendants allegations about his not learning




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