The High Court dismissed a civil revision petition filed by a guarantor against an ex parte decree in a chit transaction execution suit, citing the decree 's attained finality due to the absence of an appeal.
The Civil Revision Petition is dismissed without costs.
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.
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2383 of 2011
ORDER
The first respondent/decree holder obtained an ex parte decree on 20.12.2010 in O.S.No.1630 of 2010 for a sum of Rs.77,547/- payable by the judgment debtors i.e., petitioner and respondent Nos.2 to 4. The petitioner herein is one of the guarantors of the chit transaction. The decree holder filed E.P.No.52 of 2011 for execution of the said decree against the judgment debtors. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present civil revision petition.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record.
3. It is stated that an ex parte decree was passed in the suit on 20.12.2010. The petitioner does not dispute that he is one of the guarantors of the chit transaction. The judgment debtors are jointly and severally liable to pay the decretal amount. Since it is stated that no appeal has been preferred against the ex parte decree, it can be said that it attained finality. Hence, there are no merits in this revision.
Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No
costs.
_____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J
Date:01.07.2011 sj
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the civil revision petition against an executed ex parte decree ex parte decree should be entertained.
Whether the lack of appeal renders the decree final and beyond revision.
PETITIONER
RESPONDENT NO.1/DECREE HOLDER
GHULAM MOHAMMED
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
