Supreme Court of India
THE COMMISSIONER, RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS, BANGALORE AND ORS. versus KASLIYAPPA GURUKULA SRI VIDYA SHALA on 1 September 1995
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
A THE COMMJSSIONER, RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS, BANGALORE AND ORS. v.
KASLIYAPPA GURUKULA SRI VIDYA SHALA
SEPTEMBER 1, 1995
B
(K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.)
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 : Order IX-R.ule 13. Ex-Parte decree-Setting aside of-Application filed within 3 days of knowledge-Held C no delay.
On the question whether the State has properly given explanation for not filing the application to set aside the ex- parte decree within 30 days from the date of the knowledge :
D AlloWing the appeal, this Court
HELD : No notice required under section 80 CPC was issued. In view of the fact that the office of the Government was informed on February 15, 1984, the Government must be deemed to have had notice of ex parte decree from the date and within three days thereafter the application was E filed. Therefore, there was no delay. [247-B-C)
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 8077 of 1995.
From the Judgment and Order dated 19.6.89 of the Karnataka High F Court in M.F.A. 1046 of 1989.
M. Veer~ppa for the Appellants.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
G Though the respondent has been served, he does not appear either in person or through counsel.
Leave granted.
Admittedly, the suit was filed in which the Government was set H ex-parte and an ex-parte decree was granted. Then the state filed an 246
....
application to set aside the ex-parte decree on February 17, 1984 and that A petition was dismissed on the ground that the delay was not properly explained. The appeal was also dismissed by the High Court.
The question is whether the State has properly given explanation for not filing the application to set aside the ex-parte decree within 30 days from the date of the knowledge. No notice required under s.80 CPC was B issued. In view of the fact that the office of the Government was informed on February 15, 1984, the Government must be deemed to have had notice of a parte decree from that date and within three days thereafter the application was filed. Therefore, there was no delay.
c
The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.
T.N.A.
Appeal allowed.