Ashok Umraomal Sanehati Vs. Riapalchand
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 7 of 2000
(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 19173 of 1998)
(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 19173 of 1998)
Civil Appeal No. 8 of 2000 arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 80239 of 1998
Petitioner: Ashok Umraomal Sanehati
Respondent: Riapalchand
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 7 of 2000
(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 19173 of 1998)
(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 19173 of 1998)
Civil Appeal No. 8 of 2000 arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 80239 of 1998
Judges: B.N. KIRPAL & S. RAJENDRA BABU, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Jan 03, 2000
Head Note:
CIVIL LAW
Civil Procedure Code, 1908
Order 37 – Summary suit – Unconditional leave to defend granted by High Court – No reasons given. Held that orders set-aside and matter remitted to High Court to decide afresh on leave to de-fend. (Para 4)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Special leave granted.
2. The dispute arises out of suits which had been filed by the appellants under Order 37 C.P.C. On applications for leave to defend being filed, the High Court granted unconditional leave.
3. It would have been of assistance if the High Court had given reasons as to why unconditional leave was being granted. From the impugned orders, we are unable to fathom the reason for granting unconditional leave to defend.
4. We, accordingly, allow these appeals, set aside the impugned orders of the High Court and remit the cases to the High Court for deciding afresh the applications of the respondent herein for leave to defend. In the meantime pending such decision there will be an attachment of the entire property of the respondent herein.
1. Special leave granted.
2. The dispute arises out of suits which had been filed by the appellants under Order 37 C.P.C. On applications for leave to defend being filed, the High Court granted unconditional leave.
3. It would have been of assistance if the High Court had given reasons as to why unconditional leave was being granted. From the impugned orders, we are unable to fathom the reason for granting unconditional leave to defend.
4. We, accordingly, allow these appeals, set aside the impugned orders of the High Court and remit the cases to the High Court for deciding afresh the applications of the respondent herein for leave to defend. In the meantime pending such decision there will be an attachment of the entire property of the respondent herein.
