T.Yadav v. Sundermal
Case brief
What is this about?
Single judge quashed two interim orders passed months after the disposal of the principal revision petition, declaring them functus officio and without jurisdiction, and subsequently dismissed the applications.
What did the court decide?
Interim orders recalled and applications under Section 151 CPC dismissed; liberty granted to pursue other remedies.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA : HYDERABAD
MAIN CASE NO: C.R.P.No.2138 OF 2021 AND 2165 OF 2001
PROCEEDING SHEET
| SL. NO |
DATE | ORDER | OFFICE NOTE |
|---|---|---|---|
| 04.03.2025 | NTR,J The Civil Revision Petition was adjudicated along with C.R.P.No.2165 of 2001 on 19.10.2022. The respondents Nos. 2 to 5 in the revision petitions filed I.A.Nos.1 of 2023 with a prayer to condone the delay of 46 days in filing the petition for setting aside the order dated 19.10.2022 in C.R.P.No.2138 of 2001, and I.A.No.2 of 2023 with a prayer to set aside the ex-parte order dated 19.10.2022 in C.R.P.No.2138 of 2001. This Court on 29.01.2025 in the Court dictated an order as follows: I.A.No.01 of 2023 This application is filed by petitioner/LR’s of respondent No.1 in C.R.P.No.2138 of 2001 with a prayer to condone the delay of 46 days in filing the petition for setting aside the order dated 19.10.2022 in C.R.P.No.2138 of 2001. I.A.No.02 of 2023 This application is filed by petitioners/LR’s of respondent No.1 in C.R.P.No.2138 of 2001 with a prayer to set aside the ex-parte order dated 19.10.2022 in C.R.P.No.2138 f 2001. C.R.P.No.2138 f 2001. None for the petitioner. |
Transferre d to I/O folder before correction. |
| SL. NO |
DATE | ORDER | OFFICE NOTE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ms. Sonali A Rathi, learned counsel representing Mr. B. Shanker, learned counsel for respondents. List the matter on 31.01.2025 under the caption “for dismissal”. However, along with the above said order Court Master typed another order on the same day as follows: I.A.No.1 of 2023 This application is filed by petitioners/LR’s of respondent No.1 in C.R.P.No.2138 of 2001 to condone the delay of 46 days in filing the petition for setting aside the order dated 19.10.2022 in C.R.P.No.2138 of 2001. Having regard to the submissions, to extend fair opportunity to the petitioners, who are the legal representatives of the deceased respondent No.1 in C.R.P.No.2138 of 2001, allowing this petition found proper. Accordingly, I.A.No.1 of 2023 is allowed. I.A.No.2 of 2023 |
|||
| This application is filed by petitioners/LR’s of respondent No.1 in C.R.P.No.2138 of 2001 to set aside the ex-parte order dated 19.10.2022 in C.R.P.No.2138 of 2001. Having regard to the submissions, to extend fair opportunity to the petitioners, who are the legal representatives of the deceased respondent No.1 in C.R.P.No.2138 of 2001, allowing this petition found proper. Accordingly, I.A.No.2 of 2023 is allowed. |
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether orders allowing interim applications to set aside an ex-parte order after the revision had been disposed off are sustainable in view of the principle of functus officio.
Whether applications for condonation of delay and setting aside ex-parte order filed under Section 151 CPC are maintainable once the revision petition has been adjudicated.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Petitioners/LR's of Respondent No.1 in C.R.P.No.2138 of 2001
Coram
NTR
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Telangana HC
- Decided on
- · October
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRP/2138/2001
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court