Back
ASHISH NAITHANI
Rajendra Kumar Goel – Appellant
Versus
Praveen Kumar – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Ashish Naithani, J.—The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 24.07.2013 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Haridwar in Original Suit No. 159 of 2009 (Praveen Kumar v. Rajendra Kumar Goel and others), whereby his application under Order IX Rule 7 read with Section 151 CPC was rejected. He further challenges the revisional judgment dated 20.05.2015 passed by the learned Second Additional District Judge, Haridwar in Civil Revision No. 88 of 2013 affirming the aforesaid rejection.
2. The controversy emanates from a registered sale deed dated 28.09.2006 executed by respondent no.5 (Prem Singh), the recorded tenure holder, in favour of the petitioner in respect of certain agricultural lands situated in Village Devpur Mustahkam, Pargana Jwalapur, District Haridwar, total area measuring 1.362 hectares. The sale deed was duly registered in the office of Sub-Registrar, Haridwar, and a non-encumbrance certificate was also procured prior to execution.
3. Following the execution of the sale deed, the petitioner’s name was mutated in the revenue records, and he claims to have
(1) Recall of ex-parte order – Courts are not to be moved by vague assertions of ignorance without credible corroboration.(2) Principle of Merger, though often applied to judgments and decrees, exten....
A defendant must demonstrate justifiable reasons for absence to succeed in an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC.
The High Court, exercising its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, cannot reappreciate the evidence or substitute its subjective opinion in place of the finding....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the requirement of 'good cause' for setting aside an ex parte order should be interpreted widely, and the rescission of contract under Section....
Improper service claims cannot void an ex parte judgment if the defendant had prior knowledge of the proceedings, as judicial efficiency must be upheld.
The court affirmed that proper procedures for ex-parte proceedings were followed, and the petitioner had knowledge of the case, validating the ex-parte order.
Sufficient cause for non-appearance established where no personal service, publication notice after process server confirmed non-residence, no sufficiency finding recorded, and no intimation in paral....
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
