The court dismissed the petition seeking to condone a 419-day delay in filing a motion to set aside an ex parte decree. The court held the impugned order was passed on merits after analyzing evidence, negating the claim of ex parte status.
The petition to condone delay and set aside the ex parte decree is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C.M.P. No. 4356 of 2024 in S.A. No. 504 of 2016
C.M.P. No. 4356 of 2024 in S.A. No. 504 of 2016
R.N.MANJULA, J.
The petitioners /defendants have filed this petition to condone the delay of 419 days in filing the petition to set aside the exparte decree passed in the second appeal in favour of the respondent /plaintiff. The Second Appeal has been filed by the plaintiff who had filed the original suit for claiming recovery of possession. Though the Trial Court decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff, on the first appeal filed by the defendants, the judgment and decree of the Trial Court was set aside and the First Appeal was allowed and the judgment and decree of the First Appellate Court was set aside by the judgment and decree of the Second Appeal. As the Second Defendant did not make his appearance, my predecessor has passed a judgment dated 07.11.2022 in the Second Appeal by allowing the same.
1 of 4
C.M.P. No. 4356 of 2024 in S.A. No. 504 of 2016
of the Learned Counsel for the appellant by taking into consideration of the material facts and the materials available on record. As the order has been passed on merits, the petitioner cannot simply state that they have got the right to file the petition to set aside the exparte order. As the defendants ought to have challenged the judgment dated 07.11.2022 passed on merits by way of preferring Special Leave Petition. There is no question of considering any petition to condone the delay in filing the petition to set aside the exparte decree as alleged.
had been sent to the defendants to their very same address mentioned in this petition, but they had refused to receive the same. Thereafter, the substituted service has been ordered and service of notice got completed. As the defendants got the first appeal allowed in his favour, the observation of the First Appellate Judge for allowing the First Appeal would be the very argument of the defendants before the Second Appellate Court. This Court has analyzed the merits of the judgment of the First Appellate Court while
2 of 4
C.M.P. No. 4356 of 2024 in S.A. No. 504 of 2016
06.11.2024
Maya
3 of 4
C.M.P. No. 4356 of 2024 in S.A. No. 504 of 2016
R.N.MANJULA, J.
Maya
C.M.P. No. 4356 of 2024 in S.A. No. 504 of 2016
06.11.2024
4 of 4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the delay in filing the petition to set aside an ex parte decree is condonable when the impugned order was passed on merits.
Petitioners
Respondents
R.N.MANJULA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
