NARAYANA RAO Vs. C V S LAXMIVILASAM
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
KODAVEETI NARAYANA RAO
CHALASANI ARCHARLA SAMPOORNA, I AXMIRIIASAM ...
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) In this revision, the order passed by the Principal District Munsif,
Gudivada in l.A. No. 1244/1976 setting aside the ex-parte decree in O.S. No.
481/1973 is questioned. The petitioner here in is the respondent-plaintiff in
(2.) The suit OS. No. 481/1973 was posted to 4-9-1976 for the
defendant's evidence. As the defendant's counsel was engaged in arguments in
the Sub-Court, 3rd defendants's husband could not adduce evidence. This
fact was represented to the Court when it was called at 1 P.M. The learned
District Munsif passed over the matter. When the matter was called at 2-3C
P.M. S.i V. Ramakrishnaiah, advocate, representing the defendants' counse
submit'ed trial the defendants' counsel was engaged in the Sub-Court anc
requested for adjournment. The learned District Munsif passed over the
matter. When the matter was called again at 4-30 P.M., there was no repre
sentation and the learned District Munsif passed ex.parte decree. The 3rc
dcfendant filed the above mentioned 1 A., for setting aside the ex-parte
decree. She explained the eircumstances under which she was not able to
adduce evidence on behalf of the defendants. Her explanation is that her
counsel was engaged in the arguments in the Sub-Court in an old suit and
the counsel, therefore, could not attend the court and hence her husband
could not give evidence 10 the absence to her counsel. She, therefore,
requested that there is no negligence or laches on the part of the defendants
and the explanation offered by her should be accepted and the ex parte
decree should be set aside.
(3.) The counsel for the petitioner-3rd defendant also submitted in his
arguments that he was engaged in an old suit before the Sub Court and he
took the whole day and hence he could not attend the Court, (though the
petitioner's witnesses were ready and her husband was present for giving
evidence. The 3rd defendant sated in her affidavit in the I.A., that she was
ready with her witnesses and her husband was also presenr, but as her
advocate was engaged in another Court, she could not examine her witnesses.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.