Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. Sathish Kumar, J
V.Muruganandham – Appellant
Versus
Habibunnisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. right to challenge exparte order (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. application under section 170 does not negate the right to set aside (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. judgment to allow reconsideration of petitioners' application (Para 6) |
ORDER
Challenge has been made to the order of the Trial Court dated 30.06.2025, returning the application filed to set-aside the exparte order passed against the petitioners in MCOP No.286 of 2022, along with an application to condone the delay.
2. Though the petitioners were represented by counsel in MCOP No.286 of 2022, they remained exparte due to non filing of counter. After perusing the records and hearing the submissions of the learned counsel, the Tribunal fixed the liability on the petitioners herein and passed an award against them on 12.01.2024, and exonerated the Insurance Company,i.e., respondents 3 and 4., from the liability.
3. Therefore, the petitioners have filed an application to set aside the decree passed against them along with a petition to condone the delay. However, the Tribunal returned the application on 30.06.2025 stating that since Insurance Company has already filed an application under Section 170 of Motor Vehicles Act , the applicat
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
