Writ petition challenging the trial court's order setting aside ex parte proceedings against the respondent under Order 9 Rule 7 CPC, subject to Rs. 4,000/- costs. The High Court found sufficient cause was shown and no jurisdictional error or perversity existed, and dismissed the petition.
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.
[2025:RJ-JP:44514]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16565/2025
Mahesh Chand S/o Babulal Katara, Aged About 57 Years, Resident Of Roodawal, Tehsil Roopwas, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan)
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajendra Sharma For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA
Order
06/11/2025
[2025:RJ-JP:44514]
(2 of 3) [CW-16565/2025]
proceedings, and failed to appreciate the fact that the summons had been duly served upon the respondent, yet, without any sufficient cause being shown, the ex parte proceedings were set aside.
[2025:RJ-JP:44514]
(3 of 3) [CW-16565/2025]
(MANEESH SHARMA),J
Seema/23
2 issues framed by the court
Was the trial court's setting aside of ex parte proceedings under Order 9 Rule 7 CPC subject to costs sustainable?
Did the impugned order suffer from jurisdictional error warranting interference under Article 227?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mahesh Chand
Gram Panchayat Roodawal (Bharatpur) through Sarpanch and Secretary
Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Roopwas, District Bharatpur
Maneesh Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
