9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Appeal against refusal to set aside ex parte decree. Analysis: The case involved an appeal against the refusal to set aside an ex parte decree by the learned Civil Judge of Ratangarh. The original suit was filed by Poonamchand against Sohanlal, his minor sons, and Nanuram for recovery of a loan amount. The defendants failed to respond to summonses, leading to an ex parte decree against Sohanlal. Sohanlal later applied to set aside the decree, claiming lack of proper service and seeking to contest the suit. The court found that the summons had not been duly served, but the application was held time-barred under Article 164 of the Indian Limitation Act. Sohanlal appealed, arguing that he received late information about the decree and faced difficulties in filing the application within the limitation period. The appellant contended that he received information about the decree later than mentioned in his affidavit due to a mistake in the date provided. Additionally, he claimed that the advice received from a pleader regarding court reopening dates caused a delay in filing the application. The court examined the evidence presented, including the timing of information received by the appellant and the reasons for the delay in filing the application. The court considered the appellant's affidavit, witness statements, and the circumstances surrounding the delayed application. Regarding the limitation issue, the court analyzed Article 164 of the Indian Limitation Act, emphasizing the requirement for the applicant to have specific knowledge of the decree to trigger the limitation period. Citing precedents, the court highlighted that vague information about a decree is insufficient for limitation purposes. The court discussed various cases that clarified the standard of knowledge necessary to start the limitation period and distinguished between general awareness of a decree and knowledge of specific details regarding the decree. In the final judgment, the court allowed the appeal, setting aside the lower court's decision and granting the application to set aside the ex parte decree. The court found in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the importance of accurate information and specific knowledge of the decree for limitation considerations. The appellant was directed to pay costs for setting aside the decree to the respondent, with additional court costs fixed at a specified amount.
|
