Dismissed

Bommanaveni Lingaiah v. Sabbu Kanakamma

Telangana HC20 Aug 2010CRP/1403/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a civil revision petition challenging an order granting police aid for executing an ex parte decree. While noting pending applications to set aside the decree, the court directed the trial court to hear and dispose of those applications on merits before June 30, 2010.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the trial court to hear and dispose of applications to set aside the ex parte decree and condone delay by June 30, 2010. No costs.

Bommanaveni Lingaiah Vs Sabbu Kanakamma — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2010)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

¶2

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.1403 OF 2010

¶3

DATED 27TH APRIL, 2010

¶4

BETWEEN Bommanaveni Lingaiah … Petitioner And Sabbu Kanakamma … Respondent

¶5

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

¶6

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.1403 OF 2010

¶7

ORDER:

¶8

The defendant in O.S. No.51 of 2006 has questioned in the present revision petition the order of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Sulthanabad, dated 02.07.2009 in E.P.No.3 of 2009 arising out of the said O.S. No.51 of 2006.

¶9

Heard both sides.

¶10

The record of the case shows that the said suit filed by the respondent herein was decreed ex parte on 27.07.2007 and later the respondent herein filed E.P. No.3 of 2009 and sought for police aid for implementing the said decree, placing reliance on a decision of this Court in KHAJA SHOUKAT ALI v. SMT.KHAIRUNNISSA BEGU M^[1] . The Court below under the impugned order issued orders to implement the decree and directed the Police, Julapalli to assist the decree holder.

¶11

The said order is questioned in this revision petition by the defendant on the ground that he has already filed an application to set aside the ex parte decree along with an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the same being I.A. No.231 of 2009 and that though the said applications are pending adjudication, the Court below passed the impugned order in the E.P.

¶12

This Court, while admitting the revision petition on 23.03.2010, had not passed any interim orders in favour of the revision petitioner and as such the impugned order of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Sultanabad, dated 02.07.2009 has been operating since then. At this

¶13

distance of time, I do not think that it is expedient to interdict the said order. However, as the applications filed by the revision petitioner seeking condonation of delay being I.A. No.231 of 2009 as well as to set aside the ex parte decree are said to be pending adjudication before the trial Court, interest of justice would be subserved if a direction is given to the Court below to hear and dispose of the said applications at an early date. The trial Court, therefore, shall hear and dispose of the said applications on merits preferably before 30.06.2010.

¶14

The Civil Revision Petition is dismissed subject to the above direction. No costs.

¶15

VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J.

¶16

27^TH APRIL, 2010. VGSR/PGS

¶17

[1] 2005 (6) ALT 710

Bommanaveni Lingaiah v. Sabbu Kanakamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bommanaveni Lingaiah v. Sabbu Kanakamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kabeer Khan Vs Ayesa Bi

Nuchu Narsimha Vs Ch. Parameswar Gous

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Salgoori Vijay

Jayanthilal N. Kothari, Vs Madan Mohan Das Shah

Pyla Demudamma Vs Ch. Moogulu

Mohammed Ibrahim Abrar, Vs Secunderabad Cantonment Board