Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
In the fast-paced world of civil litigation in India, ex parte decrees can catch defendants off guard, especially when property involved in the suit has already been transferred to a third party. Imagine this: Before a court passes an ex parte decree in favor of the plaintiff, the defendant transfers the disputed property to someone else. Now, facing an adverse decree obtained without their presence, can the defendant still file an application to set it aside?
This is a common query in property disputes: Before decree, property transferred to 3rd party by the defendant, plaintiff obtained ex parte decree. Can defendant file application to set aside the decree? The short answer is yes, generally, under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), provided the defendant demonstrates sufficient cause for their non-appearance, such as improper service of summons. But let's dive deeper into the legal nuances, precedents, and practical considerations. Note: This is general information, not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your case.
An ex parte decree is passed when the defendant fails to appear in court despite being summoned, allowing the plaintiff to secure a judgment without opposition. While efficient for plaintiffs, it raises fairness concerns for defendants who may have valid reasons for absence, like non-service of summons or unavoidable circumstances.
Under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC, a defendant against whom an ex parte decree is passed may apply to set aside the decree if they satisfy the court that the summons was not duly served or that they were prevented by any sufficient cause from appearing G. P. Srivastava VS R. K. Raizada - 2000 2 Supreme 104. Courts interpret sufficient cause liberally to ensure justice G. P. Srivastava VS R. K. Raizada - 2000 2 Supreme 104.
A key concern is whether the defendant's pre-decree transfer of property to a third party bars their application to set aside the decree. The answer is no—it does not automatically extinguish the right.
In Parimal Vs. Veena (2011), the Supreme Court held that if the defendant proves non-service or sufficient cause, the court shall set aside the decree, irrespective of subsequent events like transfers G. P. Srivastava VS R. K. Raizada - 2000 2 Supreme 104. Similarly, Kurivella Rama Rao, S/o Late Kotaiah (Died) VS Kurivella Krishna Rao, S/o Late Kotaiah - 2023 0 Supreme(AP) 1094 confirms applications under Order 9 Rule 13 succeed with proof of sufficient cause, post-transfer.
Several rulings affirm this position:
A defendant against whom an ex parte decree is passed may apply to set aside the decree... G. P. Srivastava VS R. K. Raizada - 2000 2 Supreme 104. Courts exercise broad discretion, construing terms liberally for justice.
Even if property is sold before the decree, the defendant retains the right to seek setting aside if grounds exist Raj Kumar VS Sardari Lal - 2004 1 Supreme 532. The transfer of property to a third party after the ex parte decree does not automatically bar the defendant from seeking to set aside the decree Raj Kumar VS Sardari Lal - 2004 0 Supreme(MP) 49.
The decree binds the defendant personally, enabling challenge despite alienation Hargobind Agarwal VS Ramavtar Dipak Kumar Property (HUF) Represented By Its Karta - 1990 0 Supreme(Gau) 14.
Other precedents provide context on third-party rights and extensions of these principles:
Third-party purchasers (pendente lite) may not independently challenge unless stepping into the defendant's shoes, often requiring the original defendant's successful application D.BHAVANRAJ Vs RAJENDRAN (DIED). A purchaser of property... highlights notice requirements for legal representatives.
Legal heirs of a deceased defendant can file to set aside ex parte decrees. The respondent is not a third party, but he is son of the deceased defendant and he is entitled to file an application to set aside the exparte decree Gowtham Sampath VS Gurdip Singh Sandhu - 2021 Supreme(Mad) 3109.
In partition suits, ex parte preliminary decrees don't bar subsequent claims if shares aren't determined, analogous to ongoing rights post-transfer Sumathi Devi (deceased) VS Basanthi Bai - 2012 Supreme(Mad) 2598. Partition suit filed by one party against another would not bar the opposite party from filing a separate suit to claim his share in that property.
Appellate courts have limited powers in Order 9 Rule 13 matters, focusing on non-appearance reasons, not re-appreciating evidence S. Sam Davidson Represented by the Power Holder D. Suresh VS Santhakumari - 2022 Supreme(Mad) 1616. If the defendant chooses to file an application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C, the trial Court can only consider the reason for the non-appearance...
Decrees against dead persons are nullities, with legal heirs able to implead and set aside abatement Pachakat Khadeeshommabi VS Kadeejommabi - 2021 Supreme(Ker) 371, underscoring procedural remedies' importance.
These cases reinforce that transfers don't nullify core remedies under CPC, but timely action and proof are crucial.
In the given situation:- Valid Reason Required: Prove irregular service, illness, or other sufficient cause for non-appearance.- Timing: File within 30 days of knowledge of the decree; explain delays if beyond.- Evidence: Affidavits, postal records, or witness statements substantiate claims.- Third-Party Effect: Buyer gets subject to suit outcome; setting aside reopens for all parties.
Relief isn't guaranteed:- Deliberate avoidance of service or no sufficient cause leads to refusal G. P. Srivastava VS R. K. Raizada - 2000 2 Supreme 104.- Delayed applications without explanation may be dismissed G. P. Srivastava VS R. K. Raizada - 2000 2 Supreme 104.- Third parties can't directly challenge without proper proceedings; they rely on defendant's success Raj Kumar VS Sardari Lal - 2004 0 Supreme(MP) 49.- Final decrees (e.g., after appeals) limit challenges, as seen where defendants couldn't allege fraud post-non-appearance V. Krishnamoorthy VS Radhabai Ammal - 2019 Supreme(Mad) 1537. When the defendant failed to appear before the Court... now cannot contend that such decree is obtained by fraud.
If you're the defendant:1. File Promptly: Application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC with detailed affidavit.2. Gather Proof: Evidence of non-service or cause (e.g., medical certificates).3. Seek Interim Relief: Stay execution pending application.4. Consult Experts: Engage counsel experienced in CPC remedies.
Plaintiffs should ensure proper service to avoid reversals.
Transferring property to a third party before an ex parte decree doesn't bar a defendant from seeking to set it aside under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC, as long as sufficient cause is proven G. P. Srivastava VS R. K. Raizada - 2000 2 Supreme 104Raj Kumar VS Sardari Lal - 2004 1 Supreme 532. Courts prioritize justice, but success hinges on evidence and timeliness.
Key Takeaways:- Right persists post-transfer if non-appearance justified.- Liberal construction of sufficient cause aids defendants.- Third parties' interests protected via suit proceedings.- Act swiftly—delays can doom applications.
This framework empowers informed decisions in property litigation. For tailored advice, reach out to a legal professional.
#ExParteDecree #Order9Rule13 #SetAsideDecree
The defendant has not chosen to obey the decree of the civil court compelling the respondent/plaintiff to file an execution petition in E.P No.13 of 2004, wherein also the petitioner/defendant entered appearance, but subsequently, he was set exparte for his non appearance and finally, the executing court ... After such physical possession and enjoyment for over 15 years, the respondent/plaintiff sold the suit property in favour of a third p....
Hence, according to him, an exparte decree has been obtained in a fraudulent manner, without placing on record, the compromise decree passed in the previous suit. ... They came to know about the exparte decree only when an attempt was made by them to alienate the property in favour of third parties. ... 3.The defendants 2 and 7 were set exparte on 05.06.2017 and an exparte decree came to be passed on 30.11.2018. T....
of Civil Procedure, filed by the revision petitioner/3rd party, without being numbered in E.P.No.49 of 2004 on the file of the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Arcot. ... If the Decree Holder sought to exempt himself from taking notice to the legal representatives of the 8th defendant, then an application should have been moved and an order in writing should have been obtained. ... (a) For the purposes of this section, a purchaser of property....
The petitioners 1 and 2 want to set aside the exparte decree on the ground that no summons have been served on them and by precising fraud an exparte decree has been obtained. ... The plaintiff has accelerated the suit by filing applications to get an exparte decree behind the back of defendants 3 and 4. ... But here we are concerned with the explanation for the delay in filing the application to set aside the exparte#HL_E....
of 2010 ● The remedy open to a party aggrieved by a decree is either to file a regular first appeal, and in case of an exparte decree, his options are either to file an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC to have the there is no right in him to file an independent suit for setting aside the exparte decree passed in the earlier suit. ... Now, whether the plaintiff herein can upse....
In the earlier suit Palani Achari who was arrayed as second defendant remained exparte. Another brother Arumugam who was arrayed as 3rd defendant alone contested the suit disputing the genuinity of the Will of Angachari. ... In the above said background, the instant Appeal suit is filed on the ground that, the decree passed in O.S.No.318/2000 is a collusive decree. The limitation will not apply to file suit to declare a collusive decree as void. The....
While pending the application to condone the delay in setting aside the exparte decree, the 3rd defendant died. Thereafter the petitioners were impleaded as legal heirs of the deceased 3rd defendant. ... Therefore, the 3rd defendant was rightly set as exparte and exparte decree was passed on 14.10.2003. When the respondents filed a petition for final decree pro....
Such a party has remedy by moving appropriate application before the Court concerned which has passed the compromise decree. 23. The said provision does not bar the present petitioner who was not a party to the said compromise decree to file a suit. ... Property to Mr.Tilak Raj and had transferred another 1/3rd of the Suit Property to M/s Gora Mal Hari Ram Pvt. ... A compromise between parties cannot affect the rights of a third #HL....
... 13.It is also more relevant to note here that the plaintiff in that suit, who is the 9th defendant in the present suit has also not chosen to file any application to pass a final decree based on the exparte decree. ... and therefore the 3rd defendant has nothing to do with the income of the property. ... The decree in the above said suit obtained by the 9th defendan....
In that rd execution proceedings, as pointed out by the 3 defendant, she was not added as party. For that, the learned counsel for the plaintiff would submit that as per st the decree, the 1 defendant, being the owner of the property alone was prosecuted and as against him, decree was passed. ... Infact, the said application was strongly opposed by the plaintiff that having known about all the proceedings, the 3rd ....
However, where a regular appeal is filed under Section 96(2) of C.P.C., the powers of the First Appellate Court are much wider. If the defendant chooses to file an application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C, the trial Court can only consider the reason for the non-appearance of the defendant on the said date and whether it was legally acceptable for setting the defendant as exparte on the said date. Whenever an exparte decree is passed, the defendant has got two options, he can either file an application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C, to set aside the exparte decree or file a regular ap....
The contention of the petitioners that only the party to the suit can file an application to set aside the exparte decree is not correct. The respondent is not a third party, but he is son of the deceased defendant and he is entitled to file an application to set aside the exparte decree. The present two applications filed by the petitioners are vexatious and filed only to protract the proceedings and prayed for dismissal of both the applications. When a defendant dies after exparte decree, the legal representatives of the defendant are entitled to file an application to set aside ....
The learned Munsiff assumed the application to be one to set aside the exparte decree and on that basis rejected the applications. It was reasoned that an exparte decree can be set aside only by an application filed by the defendant and not by the plaintiff. It was also found by the learned Munsiff that the remedy of the plaintiff is to institute a fresh suit to set aside the decree since it is a nullity. This court held that the applications filed by the plaintiff to set aside the abatement and to implead the legal heirs were proper and that the provisions in Order IX CPC ....
The Court which passed the decree considered the evidence of P.W.1 and others and decreed the suit on 14.03.1990. When the defendant failed to appear before the Court to canvas her case and suffered exparte decree, now cannot contend that such decree is obtained by fraud. It is also to be noted that the above decree has reached finality. Therefore, I am of the view that the Executing Court’s finding holding that situation was fraud on the court nothing but against the fundamental principles of the settled position of law.
The Court which passed the decree considered the evidence of P.W.1 and others and decreed the suit on 14.03.1990. Therefore, I am of the view that the Executing Court's finding holding that situation was fraud on the court nothing but against the fundamental principles of the settled position of law. It is also to be noted that the above decree has reached finality. When the defendant failed to appear before the Court to canvas her case and suffered exparte decree, now cannot contend that such decree is obtained by fraud.
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
