Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
FAIZAN UDDIN, J.
Kishorelal Mishra – Appellant
Vs.
Prakash Chandra Parekh – Respondent
C. Revn. No. 1246 of 1976 (J)
Decided on : 18-02-1979.
(2) Civil P.C., 1908-S.115-powers of High Court discussed.
Held : The only point for consideration in this revision is whether the applicant has made out a case that there was sufficient cause for his non-appearance on 6-9-1971. The expression 'sufficient cause' has not been defined in the Code and it depends upon the appreciation and circumstances of each case for which no hard and fast rule could be laid down except that the Courts must exercise the discretion judicially in the matter of restoration of cases in setting aside the exparte decree. The real test in determining that there was sufficient cause for non-appearance of a party is to see whether the party made diligently, efforts to appears on the date of hearing, but was prevented from doing so, by some such circumstances over which he had no control. If it is so established, the case must be restored. The conclusions drawn by the learned District Judge are based on appreciation of evidence, which could not be said to be unreasonable or unsupportable by the record. The impugned order is well reasoned and does not suffer from any infirmity whatsoever. Todal v. purshotamlal, 1962 MPLJ Note 173, Bhagirathi Bai v. Chandrakant Chawla, 1961 MPLJ Note 46, Nand Kumarsingh v. State Industrial Court Indore, 1977 JLJ 545 relied on
In revision, under section 115 of the Code, the powers of High Court are limited inasmuch as, the High Court cannot interfere in revision with the decision and correct errors of fact, however, gross they may be or error of law. It can only be so in cases where the subordinate Court has exercised a jurisdictional power not vested in it by law or has failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested or has acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity. Pandurang v. Maruti, AIR 1966 SC 153, relied on.
Revision dismissed.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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
