Back
JAYANT BANERJI
Moti Singh Sikarwar – Appellant
Versus
Devendra Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Jayant Banerji, J.
1. This petition has been filed seeking to set aside the order dated 15.03.2023 passed by Addl. District Judge, Court No. 8, Agra in Misc. Appeal No. 223 of 2022 and judgement and decree dated 18.05.2019 passed by the Addl. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 4, Agra in O.S. No. 796 of 2017- (Devendra Singh Advocate & another Vs. Moti Singh Sikarwar) and the impugned order dated 03.08.2022 passed by the Addl. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 1, Agra in Misc. Case No. 234 of 2019- (Shri Moti Singh Sikarwar Vs. Devendra Singh Advocate & another).
2. Mr. H.N. Singh, learned Senior Advocate, on instructions states that he is not pressing the challenge to the ex-parte judgment dated 18.5.2019 passed by the Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, Court No. 4, Agra in Original Suit No. 796 of 2017.
3. The facts as stated in the petition is that earlier a suit bearing OS No. 26 of 2012 ( Ajay Veer Singh Vs. Moti Singh and Others ) was filed by the plaintiff-respondent No.2, seeking compensation with interest from the defendants on account of defamation of the plaintiff caused by the defendants therein. By a judgment and order dated 20.11.2018, the
Negligence and lack of compelling reasons for absence in court proceedings justify the denial of applications to set aside ex-parte judgments under Order IX Rule 13 of the CPC.
An application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC requires compelling reasons for absence; mere negligence does not justify setting aside an ex-parte decree.
Lack of knowledge about an ex parte decree can be a sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing a petition under Order IX Rule 13 CPC.
The failure to file an application for condonation of delay when seeking to set aside an ex parte decree under Order IX Rule 13 CPC is a fatal procedural defect, leading to dismissal of the applicati....
Setting aside ex-parte decree – Real test for adjudication of a petition under Order IX Rule 13 CPC is whether litigant upon learning about ex-parte decree takes immediate steps in filing application....
The Trial Court's decision in favor of the plaintiffs/respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and against the appellant without ensuring notice to the appellant and/or his counsel had been effected was in violation ....
Order passed under Rule 13 of Order 9 of CPC rejecting application for an order to set aside a decree passed ex parte, appeal would lie under Order XLIII Rule 1 (d) of CPC.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
