Supreme Court Allows Recall of Ex Parte Order in Hydro Development Case — Costs Imposed. The court found that the State of U.P. took prompt action upon becoming aware of the proceedings, justifying the recall of the ex parte order under Article 131 of the Constitution.

  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute arose from a suit filed by the State of Uttarakhand against the Union of India and the State of U.P. regarding the allocation of shareholding in the Tehri Hydro Development Corporation (THDC). The State of Uttarakhand sought a declaration that the allocation of 25% shareholding to the State of U.P. was void and requested a decree for mandatory and permanent injunction to allocate the shareholding in its favor. The suit was entertained by the Supreme Court on 06.12.2012, but the State of U.P. was set down ex parte on 16.12.2013 due to its non-appearance despite being served notice. The State of U.P. filed an application to recall this order on 09.04.2014, claiming it had received notice of the suit and had taken steps to address the matter. The application faced delays in hearings, with the court issuing notice on 07.09.2015 and further delays in subsequent hearings. The State of Uttarakhand opposed the recall application and claimed significant legal costs incurred due to the proceedings. The court acknowledged the tardiness of the State of U.P. but noted that it took prompt action once aware of the proceedings. Ultimately, the court allowed the recall of the ex parte order, imposing costs of Rs. 30,00,000 on the State of U.P. and permitting it to file its written statement within four weeks, with the plaintiff allowed to file a replication within eight weeks. The matter was scheduled for further proceedings after twelve weeks.

Headnote

A) Constitutional Law - Article 131 - Recall of Ex Parte Order - Supreme Court allowed the recall of an ex parte order against the State of U.P. subject to payment of costs. The court noted that while the State defaulted in timely appearance, it took prompt steps upon becoming aware of the proceedings, and thus, the blame for the delay was not solely on the State of U.P. (Paras 6-8).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the order setting the State of U.P. ex parte should be recalled and the implications of the delay in representation.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the recall of the ex parte order against the State of U.P. subject to payment of costs of Rs. 30,00,000 to the plaintiff, and permitted the State of U.P. to file its written statement within four weeks.

Law Points

  • Article 131 of the Constitution
  • Code of Civil Procedure
  • 1908
  • ex parte proceedings
  • recall of orders
  • legal costs
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2019 LawText (SC) (12) 113

Original Suit No. 5 of 2012

2019-12-06

R.F. Nariman, S. Ravindra Bhat

State of U.P.

State of Uttarakhand

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil suit regarding shareholding in Tehri Hydro Development Corporation.

Remedy Sought

State of U.P. sought to recall an ex parte order and file a written statement.

Filing Reason

State of Uttarakhand filed for a declaration regarding shareholding allocation.

Previous Decisions

State of U.P. was set down ex parte due to non-appearance despite notice.

Issues

Whether the ex parte order should be recalled Implications of delay in representation by State of U.P.

Submissions/Arguments

State of U.P. argued it took prompt action upon receiving notice State of Uttarakhand opposed the recall and claimed legal costs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that while the State of U.P. was tardy in its appearance, it took prompt steps once aware of the proceedings, justifying the recall of the ex parte order.

Judgment Excerpts

The State of Uttarakhand has filed the present Suit under Article 131 of the Constitution for various reliefs. The Interlocutory Application is allowed subject to the State of U.P. paying costs quantified at Rs. 30,00,000/-.

Procedural History

The suit was filed on 06.12.2012, interim relief was dismissed on 12.12.2012, and the State of U.P. was set down ex parte on 16.12.2013. The recall application was filed on 09.04.2014 and faced delays in hearings until the court issued notice on 07.09.2015.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 131
  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order VIII Rule 1
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal by Haryana State Electricity Board in Contract Labour Case — Upholds Labour Court's Award for Reinstatement.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Appellant's Claim in Central Excise Duty Dispute — Carbon Paper Classified Under Item 17(2).