Allowed

Vishnu Prasad Soni Son of Shri Satyanarayan Soni v. Pradeep Soni Son of Shri Omprakash Soni

Rajasthan HC19 Nov 2025CMA/2909/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside an order rejecting an application to remove an ex-parte decree upon the parties' mutual consent. The court directed the trial court to re-decide the civil suit on merits.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC allowed; ex-parte decree set aside; trial court directed to re-decide on merits.

Vishnu Prasad Soni Son of Shri Satyanarayan Soni… — Execution and Attachment | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:46736]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2909/2022

¶4

Vishnu Prasad Soni Son of Shri Satyanarayan Soni, Resident of Shop No. G-4, Nahari Ka Naka, Painter Colony Chauraha, Radha Govind Complex-4, Jaipur.

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Pradeep Soni Son of Shri Omprakash Soni, At Present Resident Of Plot No. 102, Riddhi Siddhi Nagar, Nangal Jaisa Bohra Road, Niwaru Road, Jaipur.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Appellant(s)	: Mr. Anant Priya Jain
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Ram Singh Gurjar

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA

¶11

Order

¶12

19/11/2025

¶13

The present appeal has been filed by the defendantappellant, assailing the order dated 14.07.2022 passed by the Additional District Judge No.1, Jaipur Metropolitan-II, Jaipur in Civil Miscellaneous Application No.33/2019 (CIS No.718/2019), whereby the appellant's application filed under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC for setting aside an ex-parte judgment and decree dated 12.10.2017 has been rejected.

¶14

Learned counsel for both the parties, upon instructions of their respective clients, who are present in Court, submit that the parties are willing to settle their entire matter finally by way of a compromise.

¶15

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that in view of the consensus arrived at between the parties, he has no objection

¶16

[2025:RJ-JP:46736]

¶17

[CMA-2909/2022]

¶18

if the impugned order dated 14.07.2022 is set aside and the appellant's application filed under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC is allowed.

¶19

In view of the consensus mentioned above, the impugned order dated 14.07.2022 is set aside, the appellant's application dated 02.07.2019 filed under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC is allowed, and the ex-parte decree dated 12.10.2017 is set aside. Consequently, the learned Trial Court is directed to re-decide the civil suit on merits in accordance with law.

¶20

Accordingly, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of.

¶21

Any other pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

¶22

(MANEESH SHARMA),J

¶23

SOURAV /52

Vishnu Prasad Soni Son of Shri Satyanarayan Soni v. Pradeep Soni Son of Shri Omprakash Soni

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishnu Prasad Soni Son of Shri Satyanarayan Soni v. Pradeep Soni Son of Shri Omprakash Soni

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

Jaimal S/O Shri Magnaram Vs Liluram S/O Bhagiratmal

Chandrika Prasad S/O Late Shri Ganga Prasad Shukla, Vs Jaipur Development Authority

Abhishek Mathur S/O Late Shri Premnarayn Mathur Vs Ramesh Dhobhi S/O Nathulal

Shri Shyam Mandal Son of Shri Babulal Koli Vs Mrs. Jamuna Devi Daughter of Late Shri Chhotu

Rakesh Kumar S/O Late Shri Yadram Meena, Vs Smt. Laxmi Devi W/O S/O Late Shri Yadram Meena

Ramswaroop Sain Vs Satyanaraya Sain S/O Late Shri Chotulal Sain