Civil revision petition filed by a plaintiff against an order allowing a defendant to condone a 343-day delay in filing an application to set aside an ex parte decree due to illness. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding the reasons for delay were sufficient.
Civil revision petition dismissed. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications closed.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5231 of 2015
ORDER :
This civil revision petition is filed under Section 115 of C.P.C., by the plaintiff in the suit in O.S.No.570 of 2014, on the file of IX-Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, aggrieved by order, dated 13.10.2015, passed in I.A.No.1241 of 2015.
By the aforesaid order, the trial Court has allowed the petition filed by the respondent/defendant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, by condoning the delay of 343 days in filing the petition to set aside the exparte decree.
In this civil revision petition, it is contended by the learned counsel for petitioner that even though there is no explanation explaining the day-to-day delay, the Court below has allowed the application filed by the defendant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act by condoning the delay of 343 days.
Having heard learned counsel for petitioner, I have also perused the impugned order and the affidavit filed in support of I.A.No.1241 of 2015 and the counter affidavit filed therein. In the affidavit filed in support of the application, it is stated by the respondent/defendant that for his appearance in the suit, case was posted to 10.09.2014, but as he fell sick and was completely bed-ridden due to jaundice, he could not instruct his counsel to file written statement to defend the case.
Contesting the aforesaid application, the petitioner herein has filed counter affidavit. A perusal of the counter affidavit makes it clear that the petitioner herein did not deny the allegation of defendant that he suffered with jaundice and was bedridden. In the absence of such denial in the counter affidavit, it cannot be said that the delay was condoned without assigning valid reasons. Having regard to the
reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of I.A.No.1241 of 2015, this Court is of the view that sufficient reasons are given for condoning the delay in filing the application for setting aside the exparte decree.
For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit in this revision petition, so as to interfere with the impugned order. The revision petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
R. SUBHASH REDDY, J
21st December 2015
ajr
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial court erred in condoning a delay of 343 days for filing an application to set aside an ex parte decree on the grounds of illness.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Plaintiff
Defendant
R. Subhash Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
