GAUHATI UNIVERSITY versus SHRI NIHARLAL BHATTACHARJEE

GAUHATI UNIVERSITY versus SHRI NIHARLAL BHATTACHARJEE

The summons was not duly served because the appellant did not have sufficient time to appear, and the adjourned date was not communicated. Therefore, limitation ran from the date of knowledge of the ex parte decree, and the application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC was filed within 30 days from knowledge.

Parties
Appellant: Gauhati University; Respondent: Shri Niharlal Bhattacharjee
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
02 November 1995
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; ex parte decree set aside; matter remitted to Trial Court
Legal Topics
Ex Parte Decree, Service of Summons, Limitation Period, Setting Aside Decree

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gauhati University

Appellant

Shri Niharlal Bhattacharjee

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From High Court Judgment

  1. 1 When does limitation begin for an application to set aside an ex parte decree under Order IX Rule 13, CPC, when summons is not duly served?
  2. 2 What constitutes 'duly served' summons under Order IX Rule 6, CPC?

Ratio Decidendi

The summons was not duly served because the appellant did not have sufficient time to appear, and the adjourned date was not communicated. Therefore, limitation ran from the date of knowledge of the ex parte decree, and the application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC was filed within 30 days from knowledge.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; ex parte decree set aside; matter remitted to Trial Court

Orders

  • Appellant shall appear before the Trial Court on December 4, 1995
  • Trial Court to take necessary steps including filing of written statement