Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Chandra Kumar Rai
Yudhisthir Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Abhishek Kumar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. case facts involve appeal against ex parte decree. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments relate to procedural inadequacies. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court observes procedural flaws in decreeing. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. supreme court precedent on issue framing significance. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. court's rationale on remanding the case for fresh consideration. (Para 13) |
| 6. orders to set aside previous decisions for retrial. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
JUDGMENT :
Chandra Kumar Rai, J.
1. Heard Sri R.C. Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri N.D. Shukla, learned counsel for the defendant-appellant and Sri Anadi Krishna Narayan, learned counsel, holding the brief of Sri Sarthak Verma, learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondents.
2. Brief facts of the case are that suit for specific performance of contract filed by plaintiff-respondent, was decreed ex parte by the trial court vide judgment and decree dated 12.11.2024. Against the ex parte judgment and decree dated 12.11.2024, application under Order IX Rule 13 of CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE , 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the "C.P.C.") has been filed on behalf of the defendant-appellant on 21.11.2024. Against the application under Order IX Rule
Specific performance suits cannot be decreed without framing issues; the rejection of an application under Order IX Rule 13 is improper if the trial court fails to do so.
In ex parte civil suits, the absence of formally framed issues can vitiate proceedings, prejudicing a party's ability to contest and present a defense, as mandated by procedural law.
Point of law: Suit for specific performance of contract for sale -attention to the pleadings and evidence in a case by the court even where the defendants do not appear and they are ex parte shows a ....
Ex-parte judgment – Ex-parte judgment should show the application of minimum requirement of consideration of the pleadings, issues, evidence and the relief sought for rendering such judgment - Litiga....
An order remanding a proceeding may ordinarily be made under Order XLI Rule 23 of the Code of Civil Procedure when the Trial Court has decided the case on a preliminary point and the Appellate Court ....
Discretion in granting specific performance under Section 20 of the Specific Relief Act requires sound judicial reasoning, considering hardship and fairness to both parties, especially in the presenc....
Specific performance can be granted when the buyer has made substantial payments and the seller's refusal to execute the sale deed is unjustified, even if specific issues on readiness and willingness....
The court held that specific performance is a discretionary relief and denied it due to the plaintiff's delay and lack of demonstrated readiness to perform the contract, resulting in inequity to the ....
The limitation for setting aside an ex parte judgment under Order IX Rule 13 CPC begins from the date of the judgment, not the date of knowledge.
In a suit for specific performance, the plaintiff must prove readiness and willingness to perform the contract, which was not established in this case.
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
