Varghese v. P.K.Anand
Case brief
What is this about?
Appeal dismissed against order denying condonation of delay in setting aside ex parte decree in specific performance suit due to appellant's lack of interest. Respondent directed to deposit Rs. 1 lakh balance consideration.
What did the court decide?
Appellant to deposit Rs. 1,00,000/- before court below within one month from receipt of judgment.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN
MONDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2009 / 8TH ASHADHA 1931
FAO.No. 177 of 2006() --------------------AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24/11/2005 IN IA 548 2004 IN OS.57/2000 of SUB COURT, CHERTHALA
(S): APPELLANT(PETITIONER IN THE IA):
VARGHESE, THATTARUPARAMBIL, KODAMTHURUTH VILLAGE, EZHUPUNNA SOUTH MURI, CHERTHALA.
BY ADV. SRI.V.L.SHENOY
RESPONDENT(S): (RESPONDENT IN THE IA):
P.K. ANAND, PARALATHARAYIL, PANAVALLY MURI, CHERTHALA.
ADV. SRI.RAM MOHAN.G. SRI.G.P.SHINOD SRI.MANU V.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay in condoning default and setting aside ex parte decree should be allowed.
Whether the appellant is entitled to set aside ex parte decree despite lack of written statement.
Whether parties need to deposit remaining balance consideration.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Varghese, Thattarupambil
- respondent
P.K. Anand
Coram
P.R. Raman
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court