Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Ujwal Chandrashekhar Belapurkar, filed a Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 11th January 2016 passed by the District Judge-6, Nashik, which dismissed his Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.102 of 2014. That appeal had been preferred against the order dated 14th September 2014 of the 3rd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nashik, dismissing Civil Miscellaneous Application No.338 of 2013. The application was filed by the petitioner to set aside an ex-parte decree passed in Special Civil Suit No.259 of 2012. The petitioner contended that due to his illness, his son's illness, and his daughter's marriage, he could not remain present when the suit was decided ex-parte. He examined himself and produced a medical certificate in support. Both the trial court and the appellate court concurrently found that the reasons given were not sufficient to explain the delay or his absence. The petitioner argued that a liberal approach should be adopted in such matters, especially since the dispute involved possession of immovable property. However, the High Court held that while a liberal approach is required, the applicant must still show sufficient cause. The concurrent findings of fact by the courts below were based on evidence and could not be interfered with under Article 227. The petition was dismissed, and the rule was discharged with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Condonation of Delay - Setting Aside Ex-Parte Decree - Sufficient Cause - The court must adopt a liberal approach while considering applications for condonation of delay or setting aside ex-parte decrees, but the applicant must still provide sufficient cause explaining the delay or absence. In the present case, the petitioner's reasons of illness, son's illness, and daughter's marriage were found insufficient to explain the delay and absence, and the concurrent findings of the courts below were upheld. (Paras 5-7) B) Constitutional Law - Article 227 - Scope of Interference - The High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India does not act as an appellate court and cannot interfere with concurrent findings of fact unless there is a grave error or perversity. The petitioner failed to demonstrate any such error, and the petition was dismissed. (Para 7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the concurrent findings of the courts below, rejecting the application for setting aside ex-parte decree on ground of insufficient cause, warrant interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision
The Writ Petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Liberal approach in condonation of delay
- Sufficient cause for setting aside ex-parte decree
- Concurrent findings of fact
- Scope of Article 227 of Constitution of India
