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

1975 Supreme(All) 150

M.P.MEHROTRA
M. P. Mishra – Appellant
Versus
Sangam Lal Agarwal – Respondent


Advocates:
A.N. Bhargava and G.P. Bhargava, for Applicant; C.P. Srivastava, for Opposite Party.

Judgement

ORDER :- This revision is directed against an order passed by the 4th Additional District Judge rejecting an application for setting aside the ex parte decree passed in Original Suit No. 81 of 1974. The said suit was a suit for the eviction of the tenant by the landlord after determining the former's tenancy. Arrears of rent and damages etc. were also claimed in the suit. The court below rejected the application on the ground that there was no compliance with the requirements of Section 17 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act and, therefore, the application under Order 9, Rule 13, C. P. C. for setting aside the ex parte decree was not maintainable. The learned counsel for the applicant has contended that in a suit for eviction Section 17 of the said Act will not get attracted. In my opinion, this contention has no force. Section 17 (1) reads as follows :-

"17. (1) The procedure prescribed in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, shall, save in so far as is otherwise provided by that Code or by this Act, the procedure followed in a Court of Small Causes in all. suits cognizable by it and in all proceedings arising out of such suits :

Provided that an applicant for an order
























































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