Showing : 41-50 of 109 Results

PUNJAB AND HARAYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 5, Order 9, Rule 13(As- - Ex parte decree - Setting aside - Delay - Condonation - Application for setting aside ex parte decree can be filed even after the prescribed period of limitation, if the applicant satisfies the Court that he was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the application within prescribed time...........
PUNJAB AND HARAYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 9, Rule 13, Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5-- Ex parte decree - Setting aside - Delay - Non appearance of Advocate, his failure to communicate that defendant is proceeded against ex parte and defendant's lack of knowledge of ex parte judgment - Can be treated as sufficient cause for condoning the delay and setting aside the ex parte decree...........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2012
Details
Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5-- Delay - Condonation - Cause shown for not approaching Court within limitation that petitioner was not physically fit and remained in hospital for some day - Held, cause shown is not sufficient as it was not necessary for the petitioner to come to Court personally...........
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2012
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 9, Rule 13, Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5-- Ex parte decree - Setting aside - Held, a subordinate Court has jurisdiction U.O.9.R.13 CPC and u/s 5 of the Limitation Act to set aside an ex parte decree and to condone the delay caused in filing such application when to the satisfaction of Court sufficient cause is shown by applicant - Whether..........
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2012
Details
Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5-- Civil P.C. (5 of 1908), S.96 - Delay in filing first appeal by Govt. - Condonation - Court has discretion to condone delay provided sufficient cause is shown - Government organization has its own administrative limitation with regard to movement of files - Necessary procedure as required under..........
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2012
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 22, Rule 11, Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5-- Non-substitution of LRs - Abatement of appeal - Application for substitution of LRs - Delay therein - Application for condonation of delay - No sufficient cause shown for delay - Held, delay cannot be condoned - Appeal abated for no, substitution of LRs...........
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2012
Details
Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5-- Condonation of delay - Appeal - On account of legal advice appellant was prevented from filing the appeal in time - Held, explanation for the same is reasonable and bonafide - That differing legal advice could be a sufficient cause, in a given case and Appellant's conduct otherwise bonafide -..........
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5-- Delay - Condonation - Wrong advice by counsel - Ignorance of law on the part of counsel - Mistake of counsel or ignorance of law on the part of counsel cannot be treated as sufficient cause for condoning the delay...........
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 9, Rule 13, Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5-- Ex parte decree - Setting aside - Condonation of delay - Applicants were poor and illiterate villagers - Advocate's Clerk did not take appropriate and necessary steps in time - Held, liberal approach to be taken - Sufficient cause made out for condoning delay - Delay condoned subject to payment..........
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 9, Rule 13, Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5-- Divorce - Exparte decree - Setting aside of - Condonation of delay - No knowledge of ex parte decree, held, to be sufficient cause for condonation of delay - Decree set aside...........

Showing : 41-50 of 109 Results