w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Legal Representatives of Gusai Karan Giri v/s Legal Representatives of Ram Das


Company & Directors' Information:- DAS & CO PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U72100AS1946PTC000740

Company & Directors' Information:- KARAN & COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U31909DL1996PTC079165

Company & Directors' Information:- KARAN & COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70100DL1996PTC079165

Company & Directors' Information:- DAS & DAS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U51109WB1950PTC019222

    Civil Revision Petition No. 535 of 1998

    Decided On, 27 August 1998

    At, High Court of Rajasthan

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD

    For the Appellant: R.K. Thanvi, Advocate. For the Respondent: M.C. Bhoot, Advocate.



Judgment Text

Bhagwati Prasad, J.

1. The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioners impugning the order of the learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) No: 5, Jodhpur dated 5-5-1998. By the order impugned, the learned Additional Civil Judge had disposed of an application filed by the non-petitioners under Order 9, Rule 13 read with Section 151, C.P.C. By the impugned order the learned Additional Civil Judge has accepted the application under Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C. and set aside the decree passed by the Court-on 31-10-1996.

2. The facts which stand out prominently in (his case are that the non-petitioners had been trying to avoid the decision of the suit by asking for adjournments time and again and the Court has been refusing it, so much so that the ex parte proceedings were drawn against the non-petitioners due to their absence. The ex parte proceedings taken-against the non-petitioners were sought to be set aside by the non-petitioners but the Court refused to set aside the decree. However, the non-petitioners were permitted to participate in the proceedings in terms of the Code of Civil Procedure. During the course of transactions on 4-10-1996 the case was posted for final hearing on 14-10-1996. On 14-10-1996 the Presiding Officer was on leave and the case was adjourned by the Court Reader. The next date fixed was 29-10-1996 though there is an over-writing in the digit 'O' constituting 10'. On 29-10-1996 an application was presented by the counsel for the non-petitioners for adjournment. The arguments on the application were heard and the case was posted for 30-10-1996. There is an over-writing here also on digit 'O' which constitutes '10' in the digit frame. On 30-10-1996 the learned Court by a detailed order rejected application for adjournment and pronounced the order. On 30-10-1996 itself as a post-script the Presiding Officer wrote that the arguments of the counsel for the plaintiff-petitioners were heard and the case was posted for decision on 31-10-1996. On 31-10-1996 the suit was finally adjudicated and decreed by the learned trial Court.

3. An application under Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C. was referred by the non-petitioners before the trial Court. The trial Court considered the arguments of both the parties and came to the conclusion that on 30-10-1996 the date was fixed for pronouncement of order on the application and on that day itself the arguments were heard and 31-10-1996 was fixed for judgment. The Court was further of the opinion that notwithstanding an ex parte order the non-petitioners were permitted to participate in the proceedings after 24-4-1996. Therefore, it was necessary to hear the arguments of the counsel for the non-petitioners but no date was fixed for hearing the arguments of the counsel for the non-petitioners. Further the learned Court has also noted that the counsel for the non-petitioners' affidavit shows that he had written in the diary 30-11-1996 as to be next date of hearing, on 29-10-1996 and, therefore, it cannot be presumed that there was any notice to the counsel for the non-petitioners for the date 30-10-1996 and in this background the Court was pleased to accept the application under Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners in this revision petition has urged that the judgment and decree passed on 31-10-1996 cannot be considered to be an ex parte decree and since this decree could not have been treated as an ex parte decree, therefore, no application under Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C. was maintainable. Learned counsel has further urged that the diary of the learned counsel for the non-petitioners has not been produced to show that he noted the date as 30-11 -1996. Learned counsel has further urged that a presumption deserves to be drawn u/s 114 of the Evidence Act against the non-petitioners because on 30-10-1996 the Court proceedings record that counsel for the parties are present and, therefore, it cannot be said that the non-petitioners had no notice,

5. Counsel for the non-petitioners has replied that the Court had not been forthright in drawing the proceedings. On 29-10-1996 the learned Court has recorded that the arguments on the application have been heard. Thus, if the arguments had already been heard on 29-10-1996 then recording by the learned Court that arguments were heard on 30-10-1996 is in contradiction to what has been recorded earlier. Further on that day the case w.as only posted for orders on the application. The case was not posted for final arguments on 30-10-1996 and it cannot be expected from the parties to finally argue the matter when the .case was not posted for final arguments. The learned trial Court has accepted the argument of the learned counsel for the non-petitioners that when the case was not fixed for final arguments on 30-10-1996 then it cannot be stated that the case was so fixed and in the post-script the Court proceeds to record that final arguments have been heard is per se an attempt, on the part of the learned trial Court, to pre-empt the non-petitioners' right and in this background the learned counsel for the non-petitioners urges that there is no illegality committed by the learned trial Court in allowing the application under Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

7. Though there appears to be a concerted efforts on the part of the non-petitioners to get the case adjourned by all means but that alone was not sufficient to give a reason to the trial Court to rush to decide the suit in the manner in which it has been done on 30th October, when the case was, listed for pronouncing of order on the application for adjournment only on that day. Even if, argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners is accepted that both the parties were present then too, further recording of the order-sheet show that the learned counsel for the plaintiffs alone were heard and there is no mention as to what happened to the arguments of the learned counsel for the defendants. It is not mentioned that learned counsel for the defendants has refused to argue the matter. This obviously leads to the only conclusion that learned cou

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

nsel for the defendants was not offered any opportunity. In such circumstances, when the Statute gives an opportunity to a party to address the oral arguments then without hearing oral argument in the suit, no decision could have been rendered. I am constrained to observe that judgment of the trial Court is vitiated only on this count. All other observations may not be gone into and, therefore, the finding of the trial Court in reversing the decree cannot be interfered with in this revision petition. The revision petition is meritless. However, it is mentioned that trial Court will expedite hearing of the suit. 8. With these observations, the revision petition is dismissed.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

09-07-2020 Gouri Das & Others Versus Nani Bhattacharjee & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
26-06-2020 Sri Ananta Das, Assam & Others Versus Union of India, Represented by the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture, New Delhi & Others High Court of Gauhati
25-06-2020 H. Karan Kumar Versus The State Government of Karnataka, Represented by its Secretary, Bangalore & Another High Court of Karnataka
19-06-2020 Jitumoni Das Versus Sri Hirakjyoti Das High Court of Gauhati
19-06-2020 Sri Bhaskar Das Versus Renu Das High Court of Gauhati
19-06-2020 Sri Bhaskar Das Versus Renu Das High Court of Gauhati
17-06-2020 Jiten Das & Others Versus Matiary Vivekananda Shikshalay & Another High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
08-06-2020 Bharati Das & Others Versus Jorhat Municipal Board & Others High Court of Gauhati
08-06-2020 Dr. Debajit Das & Another Versus Williamson Magor Education Trust & Others & Others High Court of Gauhati
01-06-2020 Nagen Chandra Das & Others Versus The State of Assam, Rep. by the Comm. And Secy., Deptt. of Urban Development Deptt., Dispur & Others High Court of Gauhati
27-05-2020 Karan Seth Versus UOI & Others High Court of Delhi
20-05-2020 Karan Alias Kalyan Versus State (NCT of Delhi) High Court of Delhi
14-05-2020 Ramakanta Das & Others Versus The State of Tripura Represented by the Secretary, Government of Tripura, Home Department, Agartala High Court of Tripura
12-05-2020 Soumyashree Das Versus Governing Body of Biren Mitra Memorial Womens College & Others High Court of Orissa
08-05-2020 Karan Seth Versus Union of India & Others High Court of Delhi
04-05-2020 Sanju Sukla Das Versus The State of Tripura High Court of Tripura
20-03-2020 Joydeb Das Versus The State of West Bengal High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
20-03-2020 Narottam Das & Others Versus The State of West Bengal High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
20-03-2020 Suresh Chandra Das Versus The State of Tripura to be represented by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Tripura, Civil Secretariat, New Secretariat Complex, West Tripura & Another High Court of Tripura
18-03-2020 Vishvajeet Dass @ Vishvanath Das @ Vishwa Versus State High Court of Delhi
17-03-2020 Surajit Das Versus The Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Ltd. & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
12-03-2020 Chinu Das & Others Versus Nimai Debdas High Court of Tripura
05-03-2020 Jaharlal Das & Others Versus The State of Tripura, represented by its Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Department of Home, Government of Tripura & Others High Court of Tripura
05-03-2020 Debiprasad Chatterjee Versus Chaitali Das West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
04-03-2020 Suryaneel Das Versus The State of West Bengal & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
04-03-2020 Shine Das Versus Deepthi High Court of Kerala
27-02-2020 Chander Kanta Kainth & Others Versus Tulsi Das Talreja High Court of Delhi
27-02-2020 Pradip Debnath Versus Babul Das & Others High Court of Tripura
26-02-2020 Saani Das Versus The State of West Bengal & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
25-02-2020 Proprietor, Gandhi Institute of Management & TechnologyProprietor Sarbani Das Versus Alok Kumar Jha National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
21-02-2020 Sunipa Das Versus Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan SEBI Securities amp Exchange Board of India Securities Appellate Tribunal
19-02-2020 Chitta Ranjan Das & Others V/S Jyotsna Das & Others High Court of Delhi
19-02-2020 Suvayan Chakraborty, Prop., King Construction Versus Subhendu Bikash Das West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
18-02-2020 Chandan Maity Versus Ananta Kumar Das High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
17-02-2020 Bhima Charan Das & Another Versus Rampada Mondal & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
14-02-2020 Gurupada Das Versus The State of West Bengal High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
14-02-2020 Sociedade Patriotica Dos Baldios Das Novas Conquistas Versus The State of Goa, through Chief Secretary, Secretariat & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
14-02-2020 IDBI Bank Ltd. Versus Sadananda Das West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
12-02-2020 M/s. Mahakaleswar Construction & Another Versus Palash Das & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
11-02-2020 The Deputy Director, Sub-Regional Office, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Thiruvananthapuram & Another Versus Surendra Das, Proprietor, Hotel Sree Visakh, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
10-02-2020 Gopal Das & Others Versus The State of Tripura & Others High Court of Tripura
07-02-2020 Arati Das Versus Sabitri Enterprise, Rep. by prop., Mukto Roy West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
05-02-2020 Arati Das & Others Versus Promodh Ranjan Das & Another High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
04-02-2020 Union of India & Others Versus Gopaldas Bhagwan Das & Others Supreme Court of India
01-02-2020 Bipul Chandra Das & Another Versus Rakhi Acharjee & Others High Court of Tripura
31-01-2020 Sanjay Vithal Das Sampat Versus Government of India, Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Central Secretariat, New Delhi, Represented by Its Secretary & Others High Court of Kerala
30-01-2020 Suani Das Versus CPIO Medical Council of India Central Information Commission
24-01-2020 Andhra Hosiery, Mens Garmentsand & Another Versus Lakshman Das & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
22-01-2020 Bharati Ghosh Versus M/s. Rajib Home Solutions Rep. by its prop., Rajib Das West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
21-01-2020 Pranati Das @ Puja Shil Versus The State of West Bengal High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
14-01-2020 Biswaranjan Das & Another Versus M/s. K.C. Panja & Sons & Another West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
14-01-2020 Md. Imran & Another Versus Snehasis Das & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
10-01-2020 Sanjay Das Versus State of Assam & Another High Court of Gauhati
08-01-2020 Parikshit Das Versus Allahabad Bank National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
08-01-2020 Mahanth Kalyan Das & Others Versus State of U.P. & Another High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad Lucknow Bench
07-01-2020 Rakeh Kumar Das Versus State of West Bengal & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
03-01-2020 Partha Das Versus Blue Line Arrow & Another West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
02-01-2020 Babita Das Konar Versus M/s. Solace Management Consultancy Service(P) Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
24-12-2019 Basanta Das Versus Shyamali Das High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
23-12-2019 Quasim Ali Versus Sajal Baran Das & Another High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
20-12-2019 Samarendra Das, IFS, East Agartala, West Tripura Versus The Union of India, Represented by the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Environment & Forests, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
18-12-2019 State of Odisha & Others Versus Bichitrananda Das Supreme Court of India
13-12-2019 Sri Prabodh Ch. Das & Another Versus Mahamaya Das & Others Supreme Court of India
13-12-2019 Ashim Kr. Ghosh & Another Versus Dinesh Kr. Das & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
12-12-2019 M. Siddiq (D) Thr. Lr. Versus Mahant Suresh Das & Others Supreme Court of India
10-12-2019 Monika Das & Others Versus State of West Bengal & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
06-12-2019 Manik Lal Das Versus The State of West Bengal & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
06-12-2019 Gautam Das & Others Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore
28-11-2019 Ranjan Das Versus Subrata Bondyopadhyay & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
26-11-2019 UJjal Das Versus Union of India, Represented by the Secretary, To the Government of India, Central Public Works Departments (CPWD), New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
26-11-2019 G. Hudson Das Versus The Registrar General, High Court Madras, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
26-11-2019 Prasanta Kumar Das & Others Versus Union of India, Represented by the Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Water Resources, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
26-11-2019 Bijay Chandra Das Versus Union of India, Represented by the Secretary, To the Government of India, Central Public Works Departments (CPWD), New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
19-11-2019 Bhagwan Das Bhajanka (Deceased) Through His Lrs. Versus Bimala Devi Goyal Supreme Court of India
16-11-2019 K.S. Anoop Das Versus State of Kerala Represented by Chief Secretary To Government, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram High Court of Kerala
14-11-2019 Jayanti Das Nath Versus The Union of India, Represented by the Secretary, To the Govt. of India, Ministry of Defence (D), New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
13-11-2019 Montu Lal Das Gupta V/S The Union of India, Represented by the Secretary, to the Government of India, Ministry of Health, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
09-11-2019 M. Siddiq (D) thr. L.Rs V/S Mahant Suresh Das and Others.* Supreme Court of India
25-10-2019 Uttam Kayal Versus Shila Mondal (Das) Developer & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
24-10-2019 Devashish Das Versus Bharati Dey Das High Court of Gauhati
10-10-2019 Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others Versus Goverdhan Das Rijhwani & Others Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Jaipur
10-10-2019 Fernando Aluisio Das Angustias (Dr.) & Others Versus Delta Air Lines & Others Goa State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Panaji
10-10-2019 Narayan Das Najwani & Others Versus Sahara Prime City Ltd. & Others Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Jaipur
01-10-2019 Bula Das & Another Versus Rabi Hati West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
01-10-2019 Joydeb Das & Another Versus Vedic Conclave Pvt. Ltd. & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
01-10-2019 Utpal Das, Superintendent, Office of CGST, Guwahati Versus The Union of India, Represented by the Secretary to the Government of India, Department of Revenue , Ministry of Finance, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
01-10-2019 Sabyasachi Ghosh Versus Pushparani Das High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
27-09-2019 Karabi Das Versus Aparesh Das High Court of Meghalaya
25-09-2019 Bhola Das Versus The State of West Bengal High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
23-09-2019 Dr. Arindam Das & Another Versus Prabir Dutta & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
20-09-2019 Gouri Saha Versus Amarendra Nath Das & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
18-09-2019 Utpal Das & Others Versus The State & Another High Court of Delhi
17-09-2019 K. Arjun Das Versus Commissioner of Endowments, Orissa & Others Supreme Court of India
17-09-2019 Tapan Banerjee Versus Goutam Chandra Das & Another High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
16-09-2019 Swapna Das Versus M/s. C.S. Realoter & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
16-09-2019 Raj Kumar Das & Another Versus Lovely Vincom Pvt. Ltd., Represented by its Director Sanjay Bagaria & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
13-09-2019 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Khem Karan & Others High Court of Delhi
12-09-2019 Anjali Das & Others Versus Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Human Resources Development, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
12-09-2019 Hemen Das Doctor & Others Versus Dilima Das & Others High Court of Gauhati
11-09-2019 Monish Das Versus Union of India High Court of Gauhati