Back
SAVITRI RATHO
Trinath Maharana – Appellant
Versus
Bhaskar Chandra Swain – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Savitri Ratho, J.—This application has been filed by some of the JDrs for setting aside the order dated 08.11.2021 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Puri in Execution Case No. 10 of 2014 arising out of C.S. No. 384 of 2005.
Case of the Petitioners
2. One Bhaskar Chandra Swain (Opposite Party No.1) filed C.S. No. 384 of 2005 before the Court of the Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Puri claiming declaration of title over Schedule-A property and recovery of possession of the same with further declaration of the right of easement over Schedule-B property. The present petitioners are the co-owners of the suit properties along with the present Opp. Party No.2- Dhani Maharana. All the defendants were set ex-parte without putting any written statement the suit was concluded on 30.08.2009 by pronouncement of the judgment and a decree was drawn on 31.08.2009. The plaintiff as the D.Hr filed the Execution Case before the trial/executing Court vide Execution No.-10 of 2014. The present petitioners filed different petitions along with a Misc. Case U/s 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure vide CMA No.-212/2021 (FN-906/21) which is subjudice. While deciding the interim petitions, the
Award of cost – Provisions of Sections 35 and 35A CPC do not in any way affect wide discretion vested in by High Court in exercise of its inherent power to award costs in interests of justice in appr....
A court cannot modify a decree for costs after it has been executed and satisfied, as it becomes functus officio.
The court maintains discretion in imposing costs in setting aside ex parte judgments, with considerations for delay and securing decree amounts clarified.
The appellate court erroneously imposed the cost of suit, leading to a stay of execution proceedings.
Costs must be proportionate to the amount of the modified decree in execution proceedings; excessive claims beyond the modified amount are impermissible.
Conditions for setting aside exparte decrees must be reasonable and facilitate participation in proceedings without imposing disproportionate deposit requirements.
Exemplary costs in writ petitions must be reasonable, based on actual gains and misconduct, and not arbitrary figures.
Imposing onerous deposit conditions for setting aside exparte decrees is unwarranted and should be proportionate to ensure access to justice for the defendants.
Imposing costs as a condition to set aside an ex parte decree is unjust, especially when the preliminary decree is set aside, and the final decree does not render the revision infructuous.
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
