Jheky] lnL;-&;g fuxjkuh jktLFkku dkrdkjh vf/kfu;e] 1955 ¼ftls rRipkr~ la{ksi esa ^vf/kfu;e 1955* dgk tkosxk½ dh /kkjk 230 ds vUrxZr jktLo vihy vf/kdkjh] vtesj ds fu.kZ; fnukad 26-2-97 ds fo:) izLrqr dh xbz gSA 2- izdj.k ds rF; la{ksi esa bl izdkj gSa fd oknh vthek us izfroknh nsoh o utkek ds fo:) ,d jktLo okn vf/kdkjksa dh ?kks"k.kk o LFkkbZ fu"ks/kkKk dk mi[k.M vf/kdkjh] C;koj ds U;k;ky; esa fnukad 12-8-80 dks xzke ck;yk] rglhy C;koj esa fLFkr vkjkth lkfcd [kljk ua- 668] 669] 670 ftuds gky [kljk ua- 825 jdck 1 ch?kk 15 fcLok gS] ds laca/k esa izLrqr fd;kA lEeu rkehy ds ipkr~ izfroknh nsoh us tokcnkok fnukad 8-10-80 dks izLrqr dj okn i= esa fy[ks rF;ksa dks bUdkj djrs gq, okn dks fujLr djus dk fuosnu fd;kA i{kdkjksa ds vfHkopuksa ds vk/kkj ij fopkj.k U;k;ky; us fnukad 28-10-80 dks vuqrks"k lfgr 7 rufd;ksa dh fojpuk dhA oknh us vius okn ds i{k esa ih-MCyw- 1 vthek] ih-MCyw- 2 y[kuflag ds c;ku djok,A oknh dh cgl lqudj fopkj.k U;k;ky; us muds fu.kZ; fnukad 5-2-90 }kjk fMØh dj fn;kA mDr fu.kZ; fMØh dks vikLr djokus ckcr izfroknh nsohflag ds fof/kd izfrfuf/k;ksa us ,d izkFkZuk i= vUrxZr vknsk 9 fu;e 13 lifBr /kkjk 151 lh-ih-lh- isk dj ,di{kh; fu.kZ; o fMØh fnukad 5-2-90 dks fujLr dj okn iqu% kq: dj izfroknhx.k dks lquokbZ dk volj nsdj okn dks iqu% fuLrkj.k djus ds fy, fuosnu fd;kA izfroknhx.k us izkFkZuk i= ds lkFk ifjlhek vf/kfu;e] 1963 dh /kkjk 5 dk izkFkZuk i= e; kiFk i= izLrqr fd;kA mijksDr of.kZr izkFkZuk i=ksa dk tokc oknh us fnukad 26-9-94 dks izLrqr dj izkFkZuk i=ksa esa fy[ks rF;ksa dks badkj djrs gq, mUgsa fujLr djus dk fuosnu fd;kA fnukad 15-5-95 dks izfroknhx.k us vknsk 6 fu;e 17 lifBr /kkjk 141 o 151 lh-ih-lh- dk izkFkZuk i= izLrqr fd;k] ftldk tokc oknh us fnukad 22-5-95 dks izLrqr dj izkFkZuk i= dks fujLr djus dk fuosnu fd;kA i{kdkjksa dks lquus ds ipkr~ mi[k.M vf/kdkjh us muds vknsk fnukad 31-7-95 }kjk izfroknhx.k dk izkFkZuk i= vUrxZr vknsk 6 fu;e 17 50@& :- dh dkWLV ij Lohdkj dj fy;kA i{kdkjksa dks vknsk 9 fu;e 13 lh-ih-lh- ds izkFkZuk i= ij lquus ds ipkr~ mi[k.M vf/kdkjh] C;koj us muds vknsk fnukad 23-8-95 }kjk vknsk 9 fu;e 13 lh-ih-lh- dk izkFkZuk i= fe;kn ckgj gksus ds dkj.k vLohdkj dj fn;kA mDr vknsk ls O;fFkr gksdj nsohflag ds fof/kd izfrfuf/k;ksa cq)k o vU; us vihy la- 39@95 jktLo vihy izkf/kdkjh] vtesj ds le{k fnukad 26-9-95 dks izLrqr dhA i{kdkjksa dks lquus ds ipkr~ jktLo vihy izkf/kdkjh] vtesj us muds fu.kZ; fnukad 26-2-97 }kjk nsohflag ds fof/kd izfrfuf/k;ksa dh vihy Lohdkj dj okn dks iqu% fuLrkj.k ds fy, fopkj.k U;k;ky; dks izfrizsf"kr dj fn;kA mDr fu.kZ; ls O;fFkr gksdj vihykFkhZ@oknh vthek us fnukad 9-4-97 dks fuxjkuh jktLo e.My jktLFkku] vtesj esa izLrqr dhA 3- i{kdkjksa ds fo}ku vf/koDrkx.k dks lquk x;kA 4- izkFkhZ ds fo}ku vf/koDrk dh nyhy gS fd fopkj.k U;k;ky; us nsohflag ds fo:) fMØh fnukad 5-2-90 dks ikfjr dh] ftl jkst nsohflag ds fo:) fMØh ikfjr dh xbZ ml jkst nsohflag ftUnk FkkA ,di{kh; fMØh dks fujLr djokus okLrs vkosnu i= nsohflag ds fof/kd izfrfuf/k;ksa }kjk izLrqr fd;k x;k] tks iks"k.kh; ugha FkkA vizkFkhZx.k us vius foyEc ds izkFkZuk i= esa foyEc dks {kek djus ds laca/k esa i;kZIr dkj.kksa dk dksbZ mYys[k ugha fd;kA bl dkj.k fopkj.k U;k;ky; us vizkFkhZx.k dk izkFkZuk i= fujLr dj fn;k Fkk rFkk mUgha nLrkostksa dk voyksdu dj jktLo vihy vf/kdkjh] vtesj us foyEc dks {kek dj vihy dks Lohdkj dj nh] tks fof/k }kjk izfrikfnr fl)kUrksa ds foijhr gSA vizkFkhZx.k us nks o"kZ ckn vihy dks jktLo vihy vf/kdkjh ds le{k izLrqr fd;k] ftlesa mUgksaus i;kZIr dkj.kksa dk mYys[k u djrs gq, foyEc dks {kek dj viuh vf/kdkfjrk ls ijs tkdj fu.kZ; ikfjr fd;k gS] tks fujLr ;ksX; gSA 5- vizkFkhZx.k ds fo}ku vf/koDrk dh nyhy gS fd v/khuLFk U;k;ky; us vius foosdkf/kdkj dk iz;ksx dj foyEc dks {kek fd;k gS] ml vknsk esa gLr{ksi ugha djuk pkfg,A vf/koDrk dh xyrh ds fy, vizkFkhZx.k dks nf.Mr ugha fd;k tk ldrkA mUgksaus viuh vksj ls vf/koDrk fu;qDr fd;k vkSj mlds ipkr~ vf/koDrk dk nkf;Ro Fkk fd og gj rkjh[k iskh ij mifLFkr jgrk ;fn fdlh dkj.kok os mifLFkr gksus esa vleFkZ Fks rks mlds fy, mUgsa vuqdYih bUrtke djuk pkfg, FkkA vius mijksDr dfku ds leFkZu esa mUgksaus ,-vkbZ-vkj- 1981 ,llh 1400] 1994 vkj-vkj-Mh- 742] 1993 ¼1½ vkj-,y-vkj- 139 U;kf;d n`"VkUrksa ij Hkjkslk fd;kA vizkFkhZx.k ds fo}ku vf/koDrk dk ;g Hkh rdZ gS fd fookfnr vkjkth esa mudk LoRo fufgr gS rFkk muds fgr e`rd ds fof/kd izfrfuf/k gksus ds dkj.k izHkkfor gksrs gS] bl dkj.k mUgsa ,di{kh; fMØh vikLr djokus dk iw.kZ vf/kdkj gS rFkk vius dFku ds leFkZu esa mUgksaus 2002 ¼1½ vkj-vkj-Vh- 417] vkj-vkj-Mh- 1999 i`"B 109 U;kf;d n`"VkUrksa dk lgkjk fy;kA vUr esa fuxjkuh dks fujLr djus dk fuosnu fd;kA 6- geus i{kdkjksa ds fo}ku vf/koDrkx.k dks lquk o muds }kjk izLrqr rdksZa ij euu fd;k rFkk v/khuLFk U;k;ky;ksa dh i=kofy;ksa dk voyksdu fd;kA 7- /kkjk 146 flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk bl izdkj gS%& ^^/kkjk 146 izfrfuf/k;ksa }kjk ;k muds fo:) dk;Zokfg;kWa & mlds flok; tSlk bl lafgrk }kjk ;k rRle; izo`Rr fdlh fof/k }kjk vU;Fkk micfU/kr gS] tgka fdlh O;fDr }kjk ;k mlds fo:) dksbZ dk;Zokgh dh tk ldrh gS ;k vkosnu fd;k tk ldrk gS ogka mlls O;qRiUu vf/kdkj ds v/khu nkok djus okys fdlh Hkh O;fDr }kjk mlds fo:) og dk;Zokgh dh tk ldsxh ;k vkosnu fd;k tk ldsxkA** 8- eSlwj mPp U;k;ky; us Singari minor by guardian mother Rangamma vs. Daddiah and another ,- vkbZ-vkj- 1854 eSlwj ist 32 esa ;g vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS fd%& "It is clear that, as stated in the section, it is case where an application could have been made by the deceased father of the defendant and as such, the Section authorises the petitioner who is claiming under him to make the application which could have been filed by his deceased father. If any authority is needed. I may refer to the decision in- `Mist. Deoki vs. Jugal Kishore, AIR 1925 Oudh 370 (A), in which it is held that: "An application under O. 9, R. 13 is not exempted from the general provision relating to procedure contained in S. 146. If any authority is needed. I may refer to the decision in- `Mist. Deoki vs. Jugal Kishore, AIR 1925 Oudh 370 (A), in which it is held that: "An application under O. 9, R. 13 is not exempted from the general provision relating to procedure contained in S. 146. A legal representative can therefore file an application to set aside an exparte decree before he is actually brought on the record." jktLo e.My dh ,dyihB us ckcqyky cuke xksihyky vkj-vkj-Vh- 2002¼1½ 417 ,oa iks[kj jke cuke gjyky ,.M vnlZ vkj-vkj-Mh- 1999 ist 109 U;kf;d n`"Vkarksa esa ;g vfHkO;Dr fd;k gS fd e`rd ds mRrjkf/kdkjh vknsk&9 fu;e 13 flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk dk izkFkZuk i= izLrqr dj ldrs gSaA mi;qZDr ds ifjizs{; esa izkFkhZ ds fo}ku vf/koDrk dh bl nyhy ls esa lger ugha gwa fd vkosnu i= nsohflag ds fof/kd izfrfuf/k;ksa }kjk izLrqr fd;k x;k gS] og iks"k.kh; ugha FkkA 9- izuxr izdj.k esa vc ;g ns[kuk gS fd vizkFkhZx.k ds ikl U;k;ky; esa mifLFkr u gksus ds fy, i;kZIr dkj.k Fks vFkok ugha] tc izdj.k esa lquokbZ ds fy, vkokt yxkbZ xbZA ftl le; okn py jgk Fkk ml le; vizkFkhZ cq)kflag] /kUukflag] gqDek cSaxyksj jgrs FksA Jherh nk[kw dh kknh gks xbZ vkSj og vius llqjky cMdkspjk iksLV Toktk esa fuokl djrh FkhA gjth o y{e.k ukckfyx FksA Jherh gstk vui<+ ?kjsyw dkedkth efgyk gS] ftls vthek }kjk mlds ifr Lo- nsohflag ij fd, x, eqdnesa dh foks"k tkudkjh ugha FkhA nsohflag dh e`R;q fnukad 10-5-90 dks gqbZA ejus ds iwoZ fiNys 7&8 ekg ls nsohflag chekj Fks o pyus&fQjus dh fLFkfr esa ugha FksA Lo- nsohflag us Jh gjhizlkn xxZ dks viuk vf/koDrk fu;qDr fd;k Fkk] ftudk LoxZokl fnukad 8-1-92 dks gqvkA vf/koDrk Jh gjhizlkn xxZ ds nSfud iskh Mk;jh dh izfrfyfi isk dh xbZ] ftuesa mUgsa ,drjQk vknsk dh tkudkjh ugha FkhA dkj.k] iwoZ esa ewy okn dh i=koyh 4-1089 dks okil vkbZA ijUrq vf/koDrk Jh gjhizlkn xxZ dks U;k;ky; }kjk bldh lwpuk ugha nh xbZ Fkh vkSj os okn esa mifLFkr ugha gq,A bl dkj.k vizkFkhZx.k ds fo:) ,di{kh; fu.kZ; o fMØh ikfjr dh xbZA 10- vf/koDrk dh xyrh ds fy, vizkFkhZ dks nf.Mr ugha fd;k tk ldrk FkkA ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us Rafiq vs. Munshilal, (1981) 2 SCC 788 esa vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS fd%& "The disturbing feature of the case is that under our present adversary legal system where the parties generally appear through their advocates, the obligation of the parties is to select his advocate, brief him, pay the fees demanded by him and then trust the learned Advocate to do the rest of the things. The party may be a villager or may belong to a rural area and may have no knowledge of the courts procedure. After engaging a lawyer, the party may remain supremely confident that the lawyer will look after his interest. At the time of the hearing of the appeal, the personal appearance of the party is not only not required but hardly useful. Therefore, the party having done everything in his power to effecitively participate in the proceedings can rest assured that he has neither to go to the High Court to inquire as to what is happening in the High Court with regard to his appeal nor is he to act as a watchdog of the advocate that the latter appears in the matter when it is listed. It is not part of his job. Mr. A.K. Sanghi stated that a practice has grown up in the High Court of Allahabad amongst the lawyers that they remain absent when they do not like a particular Bench. Maybe, we do not know, he is better informed in this matter. Ignorance in this behalf is our bliss. Even if we do not put our seal of imprimatur on the alleged practice by dismissing this matter which may discourage such a tendency, would it not bring justice delivery system into disrepute. What is the fault of the party who having done everything in his power expected of him would suffer because of the default of his advocate. If we reject this appeal, as Mr. A.K. Sanghi invited us to do, the only one who would suffer would not be the lawyer who did not appear but the party whose interest he represented. The problem that agitates us is whether it is proper that the party should suffer for the inaction, deliberate omission, or misdemeanour of his agent. The answer obviously is in the negative. Mayable that the learned Advocate absented himself deliberately or intentionally. We have no material for ascertaining that aspect of the matter. We say nothing more on that aspect of the matter. However, we cannot be a party to an innocent party suffering injustice merely because his chosen advocate defaulted." 11- ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us Sangram Singh vs. Election Tribunal, (1955) 2 SCR 1 esa vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS fd%& "Now a code of procedure must be regarded as such. We say nothing more on that aspect of the matter. However, we cannot be a party to an innocent party suffering injustice merely because his chosen advocate defaulted." 11- ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us Sangram Singh vs. Election Tribunal, (1955) 2 SCR 1 esa vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS fd%& "Now a code of procedure must be regarded as such. It is procedure, something designed to facilitate justice and further its ends: not a penal enactment for punishment and penalties; not a thing designed to trip people up. Too technical a construction of sections that leaves no room for reasonable elasticity of interpretation should therefore be guarded against (provided always that justice is done to both sides) lest the very means designed for the furtherance of justice be used to frustrate it. 17. Next, there must be ever present to the mind the fact that our laws of procedure are grounded on a principle of natural justice which requires that men should not be condemned unheard, that decisions should not be reached behind their backs, that proceedings that affect their lives and property should not continue in their absence and that they should not be precluded from participating in them. Of course, there must be exceptions and where they are clearly defined they must be given effect to. But taken by and large, and subject to that proviso, our laws of procedure should be construed, wherever that is reasonably possible, in the light of that principle." 12- ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; us G.P. Srivastava vs. R.K. Raizada, (2000) 3 SCC 54 , at Page 57 esa vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS fd%& Under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC an ex parte decree passed against a defendant can be set aside upon satisfaction of the Court that either the summons were not duly served upon the defendant or he was prevented by any "sufficient cause" from appearing when the suit was called on for hearing. Unless "sufficient cause" is shown for non-appearance of the defendant in the case on the date of hearing, the court has no power to set aside an ex parte decree. The words "was prevented by any sufficient cause from appearing" must be liverally construed to enable the court to do complete justice between the parties particularly when no negligence or inaction is imputable to the erring party. The words "was prevented by any sufficient cause from appearing" must be liverally construed to enable the court to do complete justice between the parties particularly when no negligence or inaction is imputable to the erring party. Sufficient cause for the purpose of Order 9 Rule 13 has to be construed as an elastic expression for which no hard and fast guidelines can be prescribed. The courts have a wide discretion in deciding the sufficient cause keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of each case. The "sufficient cause" for non-appearance refers to the date on which the absence was made a ground for proceeding ex parte and cannot be stretched to rely upon other circumstances anterior in time. If "sufficient cause" is made out for non-appearance of the defendant on the date fixed for hearing when ex parte proceedings were initiated against him, he cannot be penalised for his previous negligence which had been overlooked and thereby condoned earlier. In a case where the defendant approaches the Court immediately and within the statutory time specified, the discretion is normally exercised in his favour, provided the absence was not mala fide or intentional. For the absence of a party in the case the other side can be compensated by adequate costs and the lis decided on merits. In a case where the defendant approaches the Court immediately and within the statutory time specified, the discretion is normally exercised in his favour, provided the absence was not mala fide or intentional. For the absence of a party in the case the other side can be compensated by adequate costs and the lis decided on merits. v/khuLFk vihyh; U;k;ky; us i;kZIr dkj.k ekurs gq, vizkFkhZx.k dh vihyksa dks foyEc {kek dj vUnj fe;kn ekuk gSA 13- ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us ^i;kZIr gsrqd* ds lEcU/k esa dgk gS fd bldk mnkj vFkZ yxkuk pkfg,A kdqUryk nsoh tSu cuke dqUry dqekjh ,.M vnlZ ,-vkbZ-vkj 1969 ,l-lh- 575 esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us ;g vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS fd%& "the words "sufficient cause" receiving a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice." 14- ifjlhek fu;eksa dk vfHkizk; ;g gS fd os i{kdkjksa ds vf/kdkjksa dks u"V ugha djsaA os ;g ns[kus ds fy, vfHkizsfjr gS fd i{kdkj foyEcdkjh pkyksa dk lgkjk ugha ys vfirq kh?kzrk ls viuk mipkj ekaxsA v/khuLFk U;k;ky; }kjk Lofoosd dk mi;ksx djrs gq, ifjlhek vf/kfu;e] 1963 dh /kkjk 5 ds vUrxZr foyEc {kE; fd;s tkus ds vkosnu dks Lohdkj fd;k x;k gSA fu.kZ; fnukad 26-2-1997 dks i<+us ls ;g dgh fofnr ugha gksrk fd izuxr vknsk iw.kZ :i ls U;kf;d fl)kUr ds foijhr ikfjr fd;k x;k gSA 15- ,u- ckykd`".ku cuke ,e d`".kkewfrZ ,-vkbZ-vkj- 1998 ,l-lh- ist 3222 esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gSa fd%& "It is axiomatic that condonation of delay is a matter of discretion of the Court. Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not say that such discretion can be exercised only if the delay is within a certain limit. Length of delay is no matter, acceptability of the explanation is the only criterion. Sometimes delay of the shortest range may be un condonable due to want of acceptable explanation whereas in certain other cases delay of very long range can be condoned as the explanation thereof is satisfactory, Once the Court accepts the explanation as sufficient it is the result of positive exercise of discretion and normally the superior Court should not disturb such finding, such less in revisional jurisdiction, unless the exercise of discretion was wholly untenable grounds or arbitrary or perverse, But it is different matter when the first Court refuses to condone the delay. In such cases, the superior Court would be free to consider the cause shown for the delay afresh and it is open to such superior Court to come to its own finding even untrammeled by the conclusion of the lower Court. 10. The reason for such a different stance is thus: The Primary function of a court is to adjudicate the dispute between the parties and to advance substantial justice. Time limit fixed for approaching the Court in different situation is not because on the expiry of such time a bad cause would transform into a good cause." 16- Hkkxey cuke ,e-ih- dkWijsfVo ekdsZfVax ,.M dUtwej QsMjsku fyfeVsM ,.M vnlZ ,-vkbZ-vkj- 2004 ,l-lh- 1230 esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS fd%& "Himachal Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act (3 of 1969), S. 93 - Limitation Act (36 of 1963), S. 5 - Award mulcting appellant with financial liability - Appeal Challenging award- Delay- Condonation - Appellant during interval between date of passing award and date of his filling appeal taking steps challenging conviction and sentence imposed upon him and he succeeded in setting aside his conviction- Thereafter moved managing director for exonerating him from financial liability- All said events considered appellate authority for condoning delay- Delay condoned by appellate authority in its discretion, is well within its jurisdiction- Interference with, by High Court not proper." v/khuLFk U;k;ky; us foyEc ds dkj.kksa ds vkSfpR; vkSj Li"Vhdj.k ij fopkj djus ds ckn foyEc] {kE; djus ds i;kZIr dkj.k ekus gSaA vr% v/khuLFk U;k;ky; us tks foyEc {kek djus ds vkosnu i= dks Lohdkj fd;k gS mlesa ge gLr{ksi djuk mfpr ugha le>rs gSaA 17- dysDVj yS.M ,Dohtsku] vuUrukx ,.M ,unj cuke felst dVh th ,.M vnlZ ,-vkbZ-vkj- 1987 ,l-lh- 1353 esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us observe fd;k gS fd %& "When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of a non-deliberate delay." mijksDr of.kZr rF;ksa ,oa oS/kkfud fLFkfr dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq, eSa jktLo vihy vf/kdkjh] vtesj ds fu.kZ; fnukad 26-2-97 us dksbZ {ks=kf/kdkj laca/kh =qfV ugha ikrkA vr% fuxjkuh dks cyghu ikrs gq, fujLr fd;k tkrk gS ,oa fu.kZ; fnukad 26-2-97 dh iqf"V dh tkrh gSA 18- fu.kZ; [kqys U;k;ky; esa lquk;k x;kA