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

2010 Supreme(All) 3110

RAKESH TIWARI
SHAHJAHAN BEGUM – Appellant
Versus
NIGAR KAUSER – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Pankaj Bhatia and Vikram Bhalla for the Petitioner; Somesh Khare, Manish Tandon and Smt. Komal Khare for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Rakesh Tiwari, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

2. The petitioner had filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure in the Court of Judge Small Cause Court, Kanpur Nagar for setting aside the ex parte judgment and decree dated 28th March, 2006 passed in favour of the respondent whereby the S.C.C. suit No. 188 of 2005 was decreed ex parte. The said application of the petitioner was registered as Misc. Case No. 48/74/2006 Smt. Shahjahan Begum v. Smt. Nigar Kauser. Before filing the said application the petitioner appears to have presented a tender for an amount of Rs. 12,254 in compliance of the provisions of Section 17 of the Provincial Small Cause Court Act i.e. on the same date when the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed. An application was moved stating that the petitioner has deposited the tender on 18th August, 2006 which may be accepted towards compliance of Section 17 of the Act. The Court below allowed the said application of the petitioner. Respondent filed her objection stating that the entire amount has not been deposited as the petitioner had not paid the











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