High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Smt. Raj Rani v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 31516 of 2007  RD-AH 12042 (16 July 2007)
Hon'ble Janardan Sahai, J.
A decree for specific performance in a suit in which the petitioner is the defendant was passed ex parte. The application under Order 9 Rule 13 Civil Procedure Code was filed by the petitioner, which was dismissed on the ground that the decree was not ex parte but on merits. Thereafter the petitioner filed an appeal against the decree. The appeal was accompanied by an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. There was a delay of nine years. The appellate court refused to condone the delay on the ground that the act of the petitioner in pursing the course under Order 9 Rule 13 Civil Procedure Code was not bona fide. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also not been able to disclose the date on which the application under Order 9 Rule 13 Civil Procedure Code was filed or to demonstrate as to what time was spent in pursuing the application under Order 9 Rule13 Civil Procedure Code. In the absence of the relevant dates it cannot be said that the delay was explained. No ground for interference has been made out. Dismissed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.