Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Pavan Sachdeva and anr. Vs. S.M.S. Pharmeceuticals Ltd. and anr.

Pavan Sachdeva and anr. vs S.M.S. Pharmeceuticals Ltd. and anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Supreme Court of India Decided Oct 08, 2009
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/946651

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Supreme Court of India
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Civil Appeal No.5410 of 2008 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.21540 of 2006)
Subject
Civil

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

[B.N. AGRAWAL; G.S. SINGHVI, JJ.] Code Of Civil Procedure -- The Trial Court passed ex-parte decree in a summary suit. The Trial Court, by its order dated 23rd February, 2001, allowed the application. That order was set aside by the High Court and the matter was remitted to the Trial Court for fresh disposal of I.A....

Key legal issue
Civil
Acts & sections
Code Of Civil Procedure

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Pavan Sachdeva and anr.

Respondent

S.M.S. Pharmeceuticals Ltd. and anr.

Legal References

Acts
Code Of Civil Procedure
Reported In
2008(10)SCC803

Excerpt

[b.n. agrawal; g.s. singhvi, jj.] code of civil procedure -- the trial court passed ex-parte decree in a summary suit. the trial court, by its order dated 23rd february, 2001, allowed the application. that order was set aside by the high court and the matter was remitted to the trial court for fresh disposal of i.a.no.1224 of 2000.1. leave granted.2. heard learned counsel for the parties.3. the trial court passed ex-parte decree in a summary suit. the appellants filed an application for setting aside the ex-parte decree and also for condonation of delay. the same was registered as i.a. no.1224 of 2000. the trial court, by its order dated 23rd february, 2001, allowed the application. that order was set aside by the high court and the matter was remitted to the trial court for fresh disposal of i.a.no.1224 of 2000.4. having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records, we are convinced that the high court was not justified in interfering with the order of the trial court because the same did not suffer from any error of jurisdiction or material irregularity in exercise of jurisdiction. as a matter of fact, the high court has not recorded any finding on this issue.5. accordingly, the appeal is allowed, the order passed by the high court is set aside and the one passed by the trial court is restored. the trial court shall now decide the summary suit afresh in accordance with law.

Full Judgment

1. Leave granted.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. The Trial Court passed ex-parte decree in a summary suit. The appellants filed an application for setting aside the ex-parte decree and also for condonation of delay. The same was registered as I.A. No.1224 of 2000. The Trial Court, by its order dated 23rd February, 2001, allowed the application. That order was set aside by the High Court and the matter was remitted to the Trial Court for fresh disposal of I.A.No.1224 of 2000.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records, we are convinced that the High Court was not justified in interfering with the order of the Trial Court because the same did not suffer from any error of jurisdiction or material irregularity in exercise of jurisdiction. As a matter of fact, the High Court has not recorded any finding on this issue.

5. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, the order passed by the High Court is set aside and the one passed by the Trial Court is restored. The Trial Court shall now decide the summary suit afresh in accordance with law.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial