REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Sarvajanik Vyayam Mandir Appellant

V/S

ANAND NAGARPALIKA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

RADHABAI V. PURNIBAI [REFERRED TO]
CHAMARIN V. BUDHIYARIN [REFERRED TO]
ABBAS SUJJAT ALI V. RAZA AZAMSHAH [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRI ABDUL MAJID V. JAWAHIR LAL [REFERRED TO]
DATTATRAYA V. RADHABAI [REFERRED TO]
SHAMRAO JANRAO V. AMOLAK CHIMNIRA [REFERRED TO]
GAUHATI BANK V. BALIRAM [REFERRED TO]
ASWINI KUMAR GHOSE INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY CALCUTTA HIGH COURT INTERVENERS VS. ARABINDA BOSE [REFERRED TO]
SANGRAN SINGH VS. ELECTION TRIBUNI KOTAH [REFERRED TO]
SHAMRAO VISHNU PARULEKAR VS. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE THANA [REFERRED TO]
KANAI LAL SUR VS. PARAMNIDHI SADHUKHAN [REFERRED TO]
SIRAJ UL HAQ KHAN OTHERS VS. SUNNI CENTRAL BOARD OF WAQF U P [REFERRED TO]
VANGUARD FIRE AND GENERAL INSURANCE CO LIMITED MADRAS VS. FRASER AND ROSS [REFERRED TO]
JAGAT DHISH BHARGAVA VS. JALWAHAR LAL BHARGAVA [REFERRED TO]
ANAND NIVAS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. ANANDJI KALYANJIS PEDHI [REFERRED TO]
SHEIKH GULFAN TAPESWAR SAWOO J P OJHA FOR SELF AND KARTA OF JOINT FAMILY BRAHAMDEO OJHA SMT MATI BALA DASSI VS. SANAT KUMAR GANGULI [REFERRED TO]
SHAKUNTALA DEVI JAM VS. KUNTAL KUMARI [REFERRED TO]
DEPUTY CHIEF CONTROLLER OF IMPORTS AND EXPORTS NEW DELHI VS. K T KOSALRAM [REFERRED TO]
FIRDOUS OMER VS. BANKIM CHANDRA DAW [REFERRED TO]
MANOHAR SINGH VS. D S SHARMA [REFERRED TO]
CHUNDURU VENKATA SUBRAHMANIYAM VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
PARUCHURU THIRUMALA SATYANARAYANACHARYULU VS. VANNAVA RAMALINGAM [REFERRED TO]
VENKATANARASIMHA CHARYULU PEDDINTI VS. RAYASAM GANGAMMA PANTULU [REFERRED TO]
BUDHULAL KASTURCHAND VS. CHHOTELAL [REFERRED TO]
M P STATE COOPERATIVE LAND DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD VS. J L CHOUKSEY [REFERRED TO]
ABDULLA ASGHAR ALI VS. GANESH DAS VIG [REFERRED TO]
IN RE: N KAYAMBU PILLAI VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
SM ANNAPURNA DASSI VS. SARAT CHANDRA BHATTACHARJEE [REFERRED TO]
HANSRAJ GUPTA VS. DEHRA DUN-MUSSOORIE ELECTRIC TRAMWAY CO LTD [REFERRED TO]
TAFAZZUL VS. SHAH MOHAMMAD [REFERRED TO]
BATUK NATH VS. MUSAMMAT MUNNI DEI [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal under section 100 of the CPC is at the instance of the original plaintiff and is directed against the judgment and order dated 12th April, 2016 passed by the 2nd Addl. District Judge, Anand in the Regular Civil Appeal No.15 of 2016 filed by the appellant herein against an order dated 4th February, 2016 passed by the 2nd Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Anand, dismissing the suit filed by the appellant herein for non-payment of the amount of costs.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this second appeal may be summarized as under;

(3.) Mr. Chauhan, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant vehemently submitted that the first appellate court committed a serious error in taking the view that the appeal under section 96 of the CPC was maintainable as the order passed by the Civil Court, dismissing the suit for default, cannot be termed as a decree within section 2(2) of the CPC. Mr. Chauhan would submit that section 2(2)(b), no doubt, makes it very clear that an order of dismissal for default will amount to a decree, but the dismissal for default in section 2(2)(b) of the CPC would only include dismissal of suit for default on any of the grounds enumerated under Order-9 of the CPC. To put it in other words, according to Mr. Chauhan, it is only if the suit is dismissed for default on the ground of nonappearance of the party concerned, then such dismissal of the suit for default would amount to a decree. However, if a suit is dismissed for default on the ground of non-payment of the amount of costs imposed by the Civil Court below an interlocutory application filed in the suit, then the same would amount to a decree and a regular first appeal under section 96 of the CPC would be maintainable.

Click here to view full judgment.

SARVAJANIK VYAYAM MANDIR Vs. ANAND NAGARPALIKA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address