Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Friday, 07 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2019-02-07 allowed

A. Murugesan vs Jamuna Rani

Bench: 2 — R. Subhash Reddy

In Brief

A defendant was declared ex-parte and a decree passed against him in a specific performance suit filed in 1997 because he failed to appear on 16.03.2009. The defendant claimed sufficient cause: a nationwide advocates' boycott and his personal illness. The Trial Court rejected his application to set aside the ex-parte decree, citing his past conduct in prolonging the suit. The Supreme Court held that when setting aside an ex-parte decree under Order IX Rule 13 CPC, courts must consider only whether sufficient cause for absence exists on that specific date—not past misconduct. Satisfied that sufficient cause was shown, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the ex-parte decree, and remitted the suit for expeditious trial on merits."} </invoke>

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Civil Procedure Ex Parte Decree Setting Aside Decree

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login