P.P.Noushad v. Patheri Hamza
Case brief
What is this about?
The Court allowed the appeal to set aside an ex parte decree on the condition that the appellant deposits Rs. 50,000 and pays costs, restoring the suit to allow a written statement to be filed.
What did the court decide?
Appeal allowed conditionally; appellant to deposit Rs. 50,000 and pay costs to restore the suit and afford equal opportunity to both sides.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN
MONDAY, THE 10TH JANUARY 2011 / 20TH POUSHA 1932
FAO.No. 53 of 2009() ----------------------------AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 02/12/2008 IN IA.1529/2008 IN OS.121/2002 of SUB COURT, MANJERI
APPELLANT/ DEFENDANT
--------------------------------------
P.P.NOUSHAD, S/O.PANDARAPARAMBILVEETTIL AHEMEDKOYA, MANGAD AMSOM DESOM, SIVAPURAM, KOYILANDI, KOZHIKODE.
BY ADVS. SRI.B.V.JOY SANKER SRI.BIJI MATHEW
RESPONDENT(S): PLAINTIFF
------------------------------------------
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether delay in setting aside an ex parte decree can be condoned given lack of personal service and allegations of fraud.
Whether the applicant's laches precondone the delay despite absence of gross negligence.
What conditional relief is appropriate to afford the appellant an opportunity to defend the suit.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
P.P.Noushad
- respondent
Patheri Hamza
Coram
M.N.Krishnan
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court