Non filing written statement - Decree as prayed for Passed - Decree though ex parte is valid for all purposes

Citation

CDJ 2017 MHC 4184 

CDJ 2017 MHC 4184

Sengodan & Another Versus S.P. Natesan

Head Note

 

Code of Civil Procedure - Section 2(9), Section 47, Section 115,Section 151,Order VIII Rule 10 -Sale agreement - Respondent/plaintiff sought for specific performance on basis of sale agreement - application came to be dismissed as against which present Civil Revision Petition has been preferred -

Court held - plaint pleadings were incorporated and order has been passed - it can be safely concluded judgment passed by Trial Court is in consonance with Section 2(9) of CPC - revision petitioners who are Defendants had filed application to set aside exparte decree along with application for condonation of delay and same was dismissed - revision Petitioners/defendants were filing series of application to prevent Respondent/plaintiff/decree holder from enjoying fruits of decree - Respondent/plaintiff had already taken possession of suit scheduled property - Court did not find any reason to interfere with order passed by Trial Court - Civil Revision Petition dismissed.

Paras:8,9,10,11

Cases Referred:
Smt.Swaran Lata Ghosh v. Harendra Kumar Banerjee and another. AIR 1969 Supreme Court 1167(1),
Balraj Taneja and another v. Sunil Madan and another. AIR 1999 Supreme Court 3381(1),
Meenakshisundaram Textiles v. Valliammal Textiles Ltd., (2011) 7 MLJ 652,
Rajinder Kumar and Others v. Shri Kuldeep Singh and Others, (2014) 2 MLJ 496 (SC),
Topanmal Chhotamal v. Kundomal Gangaram and Others [AIR 1960 Supreme Court 388]