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

2017 Supreme(MP) 1004

ROHIT ARYA
Sushila – Appellant
Versus
Rajesh Kumar Pandey – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Shri. H.K. Shukla, Advocate
For the Respondent:Shri. R.K. Soni, Advocate

ORDER :

Rohit Arya, J.

In this civil revision under section 115 CPC, petitioner/defendant has approached this Court taking exception to the order dated 03/03/2016 passed by III Additional District Judge, Gwalior in Misc. Appeal No.145/2015 confirming the order dated 24/08/2015 passed by the trial Court in civil miscellaneous case No.18/2013. The application filed by the petitioner under Order 9, Rule 13 CPC for setting aside ex-parte decree has been rejected in a suit filed for declaration, injunction and recovery of possession. It needs to be mentioned that the plaintiff and the defendant are real brother and sister.

2. Upon perusal of the orders impugned, it appears that the defendant committed defaults through her counsel in appearance before the trial Court on certain dates as a result the trial Court had proceeded ex-parte. However, adopting the benevolent attitude, the trial Court acceded to the prayer of the defendant seeking set aside the ex-parte proceedings on an application filed under Order 9, Rule 7 CPC though subject to payment of cost. Though defendant filed written statement on 16/04/2012 but due to absence of the defendant and her counsel on 26/11/2012, the case has b













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