Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
SATHISH NINAN, SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JJ
M.K VINEESH – Appellant
Versus
RAJALAKSHMI.T.R – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of appeal and initial case details. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. contestation of delay explanation provided by the appellant. (Para 3) |
| 3. court's observations and the rationale behind delay considerations. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. final decision to allow appeal with conditions. (Para 7) |
SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, J.
This appeal is filed by the defendant in O.S.No.174 of 2019 on the file of the Additional Sub Court-II, Kozhikode. He filed RPIA No.54 of 2023 along with IA No.11 of 2023 seeking to set aside the ex-parte decree in the suit and to condone the delay of 51 days in filing the RPIA No.54 of 2023. The Sub Court dismissed the applications by a common order dated 13.11.2024. Challenging the above common order, the appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 104 read with Order XLIII, Rule 1(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure , 1908.
2. The suit is for realisation of money. The appellant is the defendant and the respondent is the plaintiff in the suit. The case of the appellant is that on 07.07.2023, when the case was listed for trial, the appellant could not appear due to illness. Hence, the suit was decreed ex parte. Thereafter, the appellant filed a petition to set aside th
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
