Search Results for "non-appearance"

49 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 49 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Rules that Setting Aside Ex Parte Decree Means Fresh Decree is Decree of First Instance for Pre-emption Rights. Pre-emptor's Right Must Exist on Date of Fresh Decree Under Section 15, Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913.

The case arose from a suit for possession based on the right of pre-emption under the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913. The appellant, Vijay Singh, a cosh...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Defendant in Eviction Suit Due to Misuse of Adjournments and Failure to Cross-Examine. Closure of Cross-Examination Right Upheld as Defendant Sought Repeated Adjournments Despite Last Opportunities and Costs, Violating Procedural Cooperation Under Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

The Supreme Court dealt with a special leave petition challenging orders that closed the defendant's right to cross-examine the plaintiff's witness in...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay at Nagpur Bench Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Setting Aside of Ex Parte Decree in Recovery Suit. Trial Court's Discretionary Order to Allow Defendant to File Written Statement on Payment of Costs Upheld Under Order 9 Rule 7 CPC.

The petitioner, Dr. Sujitnath Banerjee, filed a suit for recovery of Rs.2,32,62,249/- against the respondents. The defendants were served but failed t...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Restores Summary Suits Dismissed for Want of Prosecution, Imposing Costs for Non-Compliance with Directions. Non-Resident Indian Plaintiffs' Explanation of Travel Commitments Accepted as Sufficient Cause for Restoration.

The plaintiffs, Nakul Arun Jagjivan and Nayan Arun Jagjivan, filed summary suits against Ram V. Tyagrajan and another defendant, claiming recovery of ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Sets Aside Ex Parte Decree in Summary Suit Due to Lack of Proper Service of Summons. Delay of 164 Days Condoned as Defendant Demonstrated Good Cause for Non-Appearance Under Order XXXVII of CPC, 1908.

The plaintiff, Fountainhead Promotions & Events Pvt Ltd, filed a Summary Suit No. 874 of 2010 against the defendant, Gitanjali Lifestyle Limited, clai...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal Against Dismissal of Complaint Under Section 138 NI Act Due to Technical Acquittal. Dismissal under Section 256 CrPC for absence of complainant is technical, warranting restoration of complaint.

The applicant (original complainant) filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the respondent (original accused) f...