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

2025 Supreme(MP) 481

DWARKADHISH BANSAL
Tej Bahadur Singh – Appellant
Versus
Jokhai Singh – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Pushpendra Dubey for applicants.

ORDER

1. This civil revision has been preferred by the petitioners/plaintiffs challenging the order dated 1.8.2016 passed by District Judge, Sidhi, in misc. civil appeal No.06/2013 affirming the order dated 30.1.2013 passed by Civil Judge Class-I, Majholi, in MJC No.18/2010 whereby plaintiffs’ application under Order IX rule 4 read with section 151 CPC has been dismissed, although rightly treated it to be under Order IX rule 9 CPC.

2. Facts in short, are that the petitioners/plaintiffs had instituted a suit for declaration of title, permanent injunction and alternatively for restoration of possession in respect of agricultural lands against as many as 10 defendants. Upon service of summons, the defendants put in appearance through counsel and vide order dated 27.11.2003, case was posted for written statement for 8.12.2003. As neither the plaintiffs nor their counsel had appeared on 8.12.2003, therefore, trial Court dismissed the suit for want of prosecution although in presence of the defendant 2 and counsel Shri K.L. Dwivedi.

3. For restoration of the suit, an application under Order IX rule 4 read with section 151 CPC supported by affidavit was filed on 1.1.2004 i.e. within a perio

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