Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Purnendu Shekharmal Jain, was the original defendant in Summary Suit No. 2539 of 2012 filed by M/s ACG Associated Capsules P Ltd. An ex-parte decree was passed against the appellant. The appellant filed Notice of Motion No. 8 of 2016 under Order XXXVII Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to set aside the ex-parte decree. The learned Single Judge dismissed the notice of motion. Aggrieved, the appellant filed the present appeal. The court considered whether the appellant had shown sufficient cause for his non-appearance and whether the conditions for setting aside the ex-parte decree were met. The court found that the appellant had not provided a satisfactory explanation for his absence and that the decree was validly passed. The appeal was dismissed, upholding the order of the learned Single Judge.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Summary Suit - Setting Aside Ex-Parte Decree - Order XXXVII Rule 4, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - The appellant-defendant sought to set aside an ex-parte decree passed in a summary suit. The court held that the defendant failed to show sufficient cause for non-appearance and that the conditions under Order XXXVII Rule 4 were not satisfied. The appeal was dismissed. (Paras 1-16)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the learned Single Judge was justified in dismissing the Notice of Motion seeking to set aside the ex-parte decree passed in a summary suit under Order XXXVII Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. Order of learned Single Judge dated 29th February, 2016 upheld.
Law Points
- Order XXXVII Rule 4 CPC
- sufficient cause for non-appearance
- ex-parte decree
- summary suit
- setting aside decree
Case Details
2017 LawText (BOM) (02) 39
Appeal (L) No.98 of 2016 in Notice of Motion No.8 of 2016 in Summary Suit No.2539 of 2012
S.C. Dharmadhikari, B.P. Colabawalla
Mr. Girish Godbole a/w Mr. Drupad, Ms. Gayatri Sharma, Ms. Khushbhoo Roopani i/b M/s S. K. Srivastav and Co, for the Appellant/Applicant. Mr. Madhav Jamdar a/w M/s Vrushali U. Kabare, for the Respondent.
M/s ACG Associated Capsules P Ltd
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Appeal against dismissal of notice of motion seeking to set aside ex-parte decree in summary suit.
Remedy Sought
Setting aside of ex-parte decree under Order XXXVII Rule 4 CPC.
Filing Reason
Defendant failed to appear in summary suit leading to ex-parte decree.
Previous Decisions
Learned Single Judge dismissed Notice of Motion No.8 of 2016 on 29th February, 2016.
Issues
Whether the appellant showed sufficient cause for non-appearance in the summary suit.
Whether the conditions under Order XXXVII Rule 4 CPC were satisfied for setting aside the ex-parte decree.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that he had sufficient cause for non-appearance and that the ex-parte decree should be set aside.
Respondent opposed the application, stating that the appellant failed to show any sufficient cause.
Ratio Decidendi
The defendant must show sufficient cause for non-appearance to set aside an ex-parte decree under Order XXXVII Rule 4 CPC. Failure to do so results in dismissal of the application.
Judgment Excerpts
This Appeal has been filed seeking to assail the order dated 29th February, 2016 passed by the learned Single Judge in Notice of Motion No.8 of 2016 in Summary Suit No. 2539 of 2012.
The learned Single Judge after hearing the Appellant (Original Defendant) as well as the Respondent (Original Plaintiff), by a reasoned order dismissed the Notice of Motion.
Procedural History
Summary Suit No.2539 of 2012 filed by respondent against appellant. Ex-parte decree passed. Appellant filed Notice of Motion No.8 of 2016 to set aside decree. Learned Single Judge dismissed notice of motion on 29th February, 2016. Appellant filed present appeal.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order XXXVII Rule 4
