proclaimed offender
Navjot Singh Wahniwal
(Querist) 07 February 2010
This query is : Resolved
civl court holding that a proclaimed offender has no legal and valuable right before the court of law. Such finding whether justified?
A proclaimed offender after his declaration as PO is arrayed as defendant in a civil suit and is proceeded exparte. He files application under Order 9 Rule 13 through his mother as his attorney. Application rejected with the above finding. Whether justified? Isnt it miscarriage of justice and fun of civil procedure?
Parveen Kr. Aggarwal
(Expert) 07 February 2010
Under Order 9, Rule 13 of the CPC, a defendant may apply to the Court by which the decree was passed for an order to set it aside and if he satisfies the Court that the summons was not duly served, or that he was prevented by any sufficient cause from appearing when the suit was called on for hearing, the Court shall make an order setting aside the decree as against him upon such terms as to costs, payment into Court or otherwise as it thinks fit, and shall appoint a day for proceeding with the suit.
An application cannot be rejected merely on the ground that the applicant was a Proclaimed Offender and as such was not having legal and valuable right before the Court of law unless the courts gives a finding that either (i) he was duly served with summons of the suit, or (ii) the reasons given for his previous non-appearance does not amount to sufficient cause. On no other ground the application can be rejected.
Declaration of Proclaimed Offender may have any other legal consequences but at least he does not loses his right to contest his civil suit.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 07 February 2010
Definitely in the given facts, it is a miscarriage of justice and such order should be outrightedly rejected by upper appellate court. So file an appeal against such order.
