B. JANAKIRAMAIAH CHETTY versus A.K. PARTHASARTHI AND ORS.

B. JANAKIRAMAIAH CHETTY versus A.K. PARTHASARTHI AND ORS.

The impugned decree of the trial court had the imprints of an ex-parte adjudication, not a decision on merits. There was no indication of evidence having been evaluated or merits tested. The legislative intent does not support treating such orders as a disposal on merits, and therefore Order IX Rule 13 applies. The discretionary power under Order XVII Rule 2 Explanation is not mandatory; the court must be satisfied as to record of substantial evidence for the absentee party. Appeals dismissed; impugned judgment affirmed.

Parties
Appellant: B. Janakiramaiah Chetty; Respondents: A.K. Parthasarathi and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
03 April 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Andhra Pradesh High Court (c.r.p. No. 3277 and 3472 of 2001)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Absence of Parties at Hearing, Discretion Under Order XVII Rule 2 and Explanation, Application of Order IX Rule 13
Civil Procedure Absence of Parties at Hearing Discretion Under Order XVII Rule 2 and Explanation Application of Order IX Rule 13

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

B. Janakiramaiah Chetty

Appellant

A.K. Parthasarathi and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Andhra Pradesh High Court (c.r.p. No. 3277 and 3472 of 2001)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Scope and ambit of Explanation to Order XVII Rule 2 CPC 1908
  2. 2 Whether Order IX Rule 13 applies when substantial portion of evidence recorded and absentee party is deemed present

Ratio Decidendi

The impugned decree of the trial court had the imprints of an ex-parte adjudication, not a decision on merits. There was no indication of evidence having been evaluated or merits tested. The legislative intent does not support treating such orders as a disposal on merits, and therefore Order IX Rule 13 applies. The discretionary power under Order XVII Rule 2 Explanation is not mandatory; the court must be satisfied as to record of substantial evidence for the absentee party. Appeals dismissed; impugned judgment affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • No order as to costs