Dismissed

Sharif Mohamad v. Shri Ram Transport Finance Company Ltd. and Another

Himachal Pradesh HC1 Jul 2026CMPMO/11/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Himachal Pradesh dismissed a writ petition filed under Article 227 challenging the trial court's order quashing an ex-parte decree. The court held the trial court correctly allowed the defendants' application to join the suit filed on 26.11.2020 after they failed to appear by 28.11.2020.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; pending applications disposed of.

Sharif Mohamad Vs Shri Ram Transport… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

2026:HHC:26017

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶3

CMPMO No. 11 of 2026

¶4

Date of decision : 01.07.2026.

¶5

Sharif Mohammad ...Petitioner.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Shri Ram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. & another

¶8

...Respondents.

¶9

Coram:

¶10

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge .

¶11

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶12

For the petitioner : Mr. Gurinder Singh Parmar, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Ashwani Kaundal, Advocate.

¶13

Romesh Verma, Judge (Oral):

¶14

The instant petition arises out of order as passed by the learned Civil Judge (II), Amb, District Una, H.P., dated 24.10.2025, whereby, application filed by the defendants under the provisions of Order 9 Rule 7 read with Section 151 CPC came to be allowed.

¶15

The facts as emerge in the present case are that the petitioner/plaintiff filed a suit for permanent prohibitory, injunction, restraining the defendants from taking forcible possession and impounding of vehicle (Truck) bearing registration No. HP-19C-1747 in an arbitrary manner, by engaging hooligans and other unsocial elements, their agents

¶16

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶17

-2-

¶18

and servants and obstructing the plaintiff to ply the said vehicle. The said vehicle was financed from the defendants on 10.01.2018 for a sum of Rs. 8,50,000/- along with interest Rs. 3,50,624/- amounting to Rs. 12,00,624/- for a period of four years. It is the case of the plaintiff that despite paying the installments, the defendants are threatening to take forcible possession and impounding the said vehicle in an arbitrary manner by engaging hooligans and other unsocial elements, their agents and servants and obstructing the plaintiff to ply the said vehicle. The defendants were requested number of times to desist from their illegal act but the defendants denied the request of the plaintiff. Therefore, the plaintiff prayed from temporary injunction restraining the defendants from taking forcible possession and impounding of the vehicle (Truck) bearing registration No. HP-19C-1747 from the learned trial Court

¶19

The suit was presented by the plaintiff on 26.11.2020 as per Annexure P-7, which reveals that the said suit was received through electronic mode and was put up on 27.11.2020. As per Annexure P-3, on 28.11.2020, the defendants were not present despite service and thereafter, the case was called in post lunch session but none appeared and

¶20

-3-

¶21

they were proceeded against ex-parte. Thereafter, the case was fixed for further orders on 19.02.2021.

¶22

The defendants filed an application under Order 9 rule 7 read with Section 151 CPC for setting aside the ex-parte order, as passed against them. Copy of the application has been placed on record.

¶23

The said application came to be resisted by the petitioner/plaintiff and all the averments as made in the application were refuted and denied.

¶24

The learned trial Court vide its impugned order dated 24.10.2025 allowed the application and the order of exparte against the defendants was quashed and set aside and the defendants were permitted to join the proceedings. .

¶25

Feeling dissatisfied, the petitioner/plaintiff has approached this Court by filing petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶26

It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order as passed by the learned trial Court is erroneous and is liable to be quashed and set aside.

¶27

On the other hand learned counsel for the respondents has defended the impugned order. He submits that the order which has been passed by the learned court is

¶28

-4-

¶29

well reasoned order and call for no interference in the present proceedings.

¶30

Admittedly, in the present case, the suit was filed by the plaintiff on 26.11.2020 and on the very next date i.e. 28.11.2020, the defendants were proceeded against ex-parte on the premise that the defendants stand served. However, none had put in appearance on their behalf. The learned trial Court has rightly exercised the jurisdiction by allowing the application. This Court is in agreement with the contention of learned counsel for the respondents that during the span of three days, the defendants have been ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte, which is uncalled for.

¶31

This Court does not find any infirmity and illegality in the impugned order. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶32

(Romesh Verma) Judge

¶33

1^st July, 2026. (kck)

Sharif Mohamad v. Shri Ram Transport Finance Company Ltd. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sharif Mohamad v. Shri Ram Transport Finance Company Ltd. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

NHAI Vs Ram Prakash

Sunita Devi and Another Vs Satpal Singh

State of Hp and Another Vs Mohan Singh and Others

Puneet Kumar Vs Narinder Kumar and Another

NHAI Vs Pratap Singh

Bhagwant Kishore Vs Nipun Jindal and Another