The Commissioner, Religious & Charitable Endowments, Bangalore & Ors. Vs. Kasliyappa Gurukula Sri Vidya S
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 8077 of 1995
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 15854 of 1989)
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 15854 of 1989)
Petitioner: The Commissioner, Religious & Charitable Endowments, Bangalore & Ors.
Respondent: Kasliyappa Gurukula Sri Vidya Shala
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 8077 of 1995
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 15854 of 1989)
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 15854 of 1989)
Judges: K. RAMASWAMY &
B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.
B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Sep 01, 1995
Head Note:
CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908:
Section 80 – Ex parte decree granted against the State Govt. – Application of the State to set aside ex parte decree allowed as being within time.
JUDGEMENT:
O R D E R
1. Though the respondent has been served, he does not appear either in person or through counsel.
2. Leave granted.
3. Admittedly, the suit was filed in which the Government was set ex-parte and an ex-parte decree was granted. Then the State filed an application to set aside the ex-parte decree on February 17, 1984 and that petition was dismissed on the ground that the delay was not properly explained. The appeal was also dismissed by the High Court.
4. The question is whether is State has properly given explanation for not filing the application to set aside the ex-parte decree within 30 days from the date of the knowledge. No notice required under s.80 CPC was issued. In view of the fact that the office of the Government was informed on February 15, 1984, the Government must be deemed to have had notice of ex-parte decree from that date and within three days thereafter the application was filed. Therefore, there was no delay.
5. The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.
1. Though the respondent has been served, he does not appear either in person or through counsel.
2. Leave granted.
3. Admittedly, the suit was filed in which the Government was set ex-parte and an ex-parte decree was granted. Then the State filed an application to set aside the ex-parte decree on February 17, 1984 and that petition was dismissed on the ground that the delay was not properly explained. The appeal was also dismissed by the High Court.
4. The question is whether is State has properly given explanation for not filing the application to set aside the ex-parte decree within 30 days from the date of the knowledge. No notice required under s.80 CPC was issued. In view of the fact that the office of the Government was informed on February 15, 1984, the Government must be deemed to have had notice of ex-parte decree from that date and within three days thereafter the application was filed. Therefore, there was no delay.
5. The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.
