Search Results for "setting aside exparte decree"

203 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 203 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Karnataka High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Lok Adalat Compromise Decree in Partition Suit: Third Party Not Permitted to Invoke Article 226 Against Lok Adalat Award. Writ Remedy Not Available to Strangers to Decree; Proper Recourse Is to File a Separate Suit for Declaration and Partition.

The writ petition was filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by five individuals claiming to be members of the same family as t...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Second Appeal Against Rejection of Condonation of Delay in Exparte Decree Case. Court Holds That Liberal Approach Is Required When Delay Is Not Due to Wilful Neglect and Sufficient Cause Is Shown.

The case involves a Second Appeal filed by Pushkaraj Wagh (appellant/original defendant) against an exparte decree passed in Spl. Civil Suit No. 22/20...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Wife's Appeal Against Ex Parte Divorce Decree for Lack of Proper Service. Family Court's Finding of Sufficient Service Based on 'Refused' Endorsement Set Aside as Notice Was Not Properly Addressed.

The appellant-wife married the respondent-husband on 10.7.2005 and they have a male child. On 26.3.2012, the husband filed a petition under Section 13...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitioner's Challenge to Rejection of Condonation of Delay in Filing First Appeal Against Exparte Decree. Delay of 30 months and 14 days not sufficiently explained; fraud allegation not substantiated.

The Petitioner, Shamrao Piraji Kadam, filed a Writ Petition challenging the Judgment and Order dated 20.07.2021 passed by the learned District Judge-6...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Interim Status Quo Order in Second Appeal for Non-Compliance with Section 100 CPC. High Court Cannot Grant Interim Relief Without First Formulating Substantial Question of Law.

The Supreme Court considered an appeal against an interim order dated 20.09.2024 passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in a second appeal. The di...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Ex-Parte Award Passed Against Deceased Proprietor Due to Improper Service on Wrong Legal Heir. Service of Notice on Non-Existent Person Invalidates Ex-Parte Proceedings and Award.

The petitioner, Ashish Arunkumar Kejriwal, filed a writ petition challenging an order of the Industrial Court that rejected his application to set asi...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court at Goa Allows Writ Petition Challenging Execution Order in Eviction Suit — Mundkar Claim Rejected, Adverse Possession Not Proven. The executing court erred in dismissing execution on the ground of adverse possession when the decree was valid and the issue was already decided.

The petitioners, Miss Aura Serafina Crispina de Souza and Miss Agnes Felicia de Souza, are the original decree-holders who obtained an eviction decree...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows Revision Petition in Partition Suit, Sets Aside Dismissal of Restoration Application Due to COVID-19 Delay. Court Holds That Length of Delay Alone Not Decisive; Equitable Considerations and Lack of Final Decree Proceedings Warrant Opportunity to Contest.

The case arises from a partition suit filed by the respondent (sister) against the petitioner (sister-in-law) in O.S.No.212 of 2011 before the Subordi...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Landlords' Writ Petition in Rent Control Eviction Case — Ex Parte Decree Restored. Tenant Failed to Show Sufficient Cause for Absence Under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC; Decree for Possession on Grounds of Default, Subletting, and Profiteering Under Bombay Rent Act Upheld.

The petitioners, landlords of the suit premises, filed a suit for possession against the tenant (respondent no.1) and alleged subtenants (respondent n...