Case Details

Citation(s)
1995 SLG 1106 1995 SLD 1106 1995 CLC 1200
Supreme Court (AJ&K)
Civil Appeal No. 21 of 1994, decision dated: 22-02-1995 (On appeal from the judgment of the High Court dated 30-1-1~A it Civil Appeal No. 61 of 1987)
BASHARAT AHMAD SHAIKH AND MUHAMMAD YOUNAS SURAKHVI, JJ
M. Tabassum Aftab Alvi, Advocate for Appellants. Farooq Hussain Kashmiri, Advocate for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 11

MUHAMMAD ILYAS and 3 others

VS

AZIZ-URREHMAN and 38 others /Proforma --Respondents

Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-------O. IX, R. 13, O.XLVII, R.1 & S. 96---Mode of setting aside ex parte decree---Ex pane decree being only voidable, unless and until annulled, it would have all the force of valid decree---Defendant against whom ex parte decree had been passed was entitled to seek remedy against the same by moving application under O.IX, R.13, C.P.C. for setting aside such decree within 30 days from the date of decree or from date of knowledge or by seeking review or by instituting a suit on the ground of fraud---In some cases however, . inherent powers were also available for the said purpose--­Defendants availed remedy of suit for setting aside ex parte decree on basis of fraud but no fraud was specifically pleaded---For the maintainability of such suit fraud must be actually positive, amounting to intentional contrivance to keep the parties and Court in ignorance of real facts for the purpose of obtaining decree by such contrivance---Fraud must also be extrinsic to the proceedings of Court---Plaintiff's suit against ex parte decree for lack of disclosure of particulars of fraud was not maintainable in circumstances.--­[Fraud]. (b) Limitation Act (IX of 1908)--- ---Art. 181---Suit for setting aside ex parte decree---Period of three years is provided ,for filing such suit---Plaintiffs' suit was filed beyond period of three years--Plaintiffs had appeared as defendants in earlier suit (culminating into ex parte decree) had filed his written statement, issues were framed in his presence and bulk of evidence was recorded in his presence and then he absented himself---Plaintiffs thus, were well aware of the ex parte decree passed against them and they did not choose to get the same set aside within time---Suit for setting aside ex parte decree was, thus, not maintainable on ground of limitation. (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O.XXXII,R. 4 & 0.1, R. 5---Non-appointment of guardian ad litem or next friend of defendant of unsound mind---Effect---Where defendant was alleged to be of unsound mind who had sold his property to other defendants, vendee­defendants having stepped into the shoes of such vendors, he was only proper…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492