Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Khodlyaar Rolling Mills vs Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Ltd.

Supreme Court20 November 2018Indira Banerjee · R. Banumathi

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure to set aside an ex-parte decree is filed with substantial delay, the court may set aside the decree without examining the sufficiency of the explanation for delay if the party demonstrates bona fide by depositing a substantial sum as security towards the disputed claim, such deposit being sufficient to afford the party an opportunity to be heard on the merits of the suit.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

1

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL No(s). 11227 OF 2018 (Arising out of SLP(C)No.1491 of 2015)

KHODIYAAR ROLLING MILLS Appellant(s)

VERSUS

PASCHIM GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD. Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

BANUMATHI, J.:

(1) Leave granted.

(2) This appeal arises out of judgment and order dated 25th

July, 2014 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in

Special Civil Application No.15454 of 2013 in and by which the

High Court affirmed the order of the court below refusing to

set aside the ex-parte decree passed by the trial court in

Special Civil Suit No.56 of 2006.

(3) The appellant was running a mill and the respondent was a

distributer of the electricity for the area including the mill

in the premises of the appellant.

Signature Not Verified

There was a outstanding due Digitally signed by MAHABIR SINGH Date: 2018.11.26

of Rs.63,41,994.20.

17:38:14 IST Reason: The respondent filed Special Civil Suit

No.56 of 2006 for recovery of the said outstanding amount. In

the said suit the appellant has not entered appearance and an 2

ex-parte decree was passed on 17th April, 2007. The appellant

herein has filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the

C.P.C. to set aside the ex-parte decree which was filed with

delay of twenty months and thirteen days. The Trial Court held

that the appellant has not satisfactorily explained the delay

of filing the said application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the

C.P.C. and accordingly dismissed the same. In the revision the

said order was affirmed by the High Court holding that the

appellant had knowledge about passing of the ex-parte decree.

(4) We have heard Mr. Jay Savla, learned counsel appearing for

the appellant and Mr. Pradeep Misra, learned counsel appearing

for the respondent and also perused the impugned judgment.

(5) By order dated 8th January, 2015 this Court has directed

the appellant to deposit a sum of Rs.70,00,000/- (Rupees

Seventy Lakhs) with the respondent without prejudice to his

contention. In compliance thereof, the appellant has deposited

Rs.70,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Lakhs) with the respondent.

Since the appellant has shown his bona fide by depositing

Rs.70,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Lakhs), without going into the

merits of the case, with a view to afford an opportunity of

hearing to the appellant in the suit, the ex-parte decree

(dated 17.4.2007) passed in Special Civil Suit NO.56 of 2006 is

set aside and this appeal is allowed. The Trial Court is

directed to restore Special Civil Suit NO.56 of 2006 to its

original number and proceed with the same in accordance with 3

law. Since the said suit is of the year 2006 the same shall be

decided as expeditiously as possible. The appellant shall file

his written submission within four weeks from today. As

observed by this Court by Order dated 8 th January, 2015 the

deposit of Rs.70,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Lakhs) will be

subject to the final outcome of the dispute between the

parties.

(6) No costs.

..........................J. (R. BANUMATHI)

..........................J. (INDIRA BANERJEE) NEW DELHI, NOVEMBER 20, 2018.

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free