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

2012 Supreme(All) 837

SHRI NARAYAN SHUKLA
Sunil Kumar Soni – Appellant
Versus
District Judge, Sultanpur and others – Respondent


Ram Lagan Mishra, Advocate, for the petitioner
Sharad Pathak, Advocates, for the opposite parties.

Shri Narayan Shukla, J.—

Heard Mr Ram Lagan Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr Sharad Pathak, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 3 to 5.

By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 31.1.2012, passed by the District Judge, Sultanpur and judgment and order dated 5.2.2011 and 27.2.2008, passed by Civil Judge ( Senior Division), Sultanpur.

The facts of the present case are that the Small Cause Court proceeded to pass judgment and decree on 27.2.2008 against the petitioner. On the basis of the said judgment, the respondent/ plaintiff also proceeded for execution of order. The petitioner moved an application under Order IX Rule 13 read with Section 151 C.P.C. and Section 17 of the Small Cause Courts Act with the submission that he heard about the said judgment and decree by some persons, who were told by the respondent at first time only on 27th March, 2009. He immediately rushed to his counsel, who enquired and found that one Execution Case no.1 of 2008 has been filed against the petitioner, then on the same very date his counsel put in appearance in the said case and asked time to file objection in the execution proceeding






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