Civil Procedure , 1908 ( CPC ) is filed challenging the order of the court
below dated 24.3.2017 by which the application under Order IX Rule ... CPC , the court below has
rightly treated the application under Order XXXVII Rule 4 CPC
instead of being under Order IX
decree be set aside.
4. The court below for dismissing the application under
Order IX Rule 13 CPC has given the following conclusions ... application under
FAO No.377/2017 Page 4 of 6
Order IX Rule 13 CPC in favour of Ms. Hemlata Agarwal contained
ORAL)
1. The first appeal under Order XLIII (1)(d) of the Code of
Civil Procedure , 1908 ( CPC ) is filed by the appellant ... when the
FAO No. 289/2017 Page 4 of 5
application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC is filed, and which
court has dismissed the application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC
filed by the appellant/defendant.
4. The facts of the case ... rate of 14% per annum.
6. The subject application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC was
filed by the appellant/defendant pleading that
stay)
1. This first appeal under Order XLIII (1)(d) of the Code of
Civil Procedure , 1908 ( CPC ) is filed by the defendant ... 2017 Page 1 of 4
the application filed by the appellant/defendant under Order IX Rule
13 CPC has been dismissed
application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC in terms
of the order dated 4.7.2003, the subject application under Section 144
CPC ... bank on certain deposits but the
RSA No.240/2017 Page 4 of 9
general may only be a specific lien. Section
defendant are of March, 2015 and September,
FAO No. 380/2017 Page 4 of 7
2015, i.e not of the period when the case ... particulars or details in the subject
application under Order IX Rules 7 and 13 CPC and the nature of
illness of his mother
impugned order passed by the court below dated
8.8.2017 by which the application filed by the appellant/defendant
under Order IX Rule 13 CPC ... stage to refer to the provision of
second Proviso to Order IX Rule 13 CPC which was introduced
appeal is filed under Order XLIII(1)(d) of Code
of Civil Procedure , 1908 ( CPC ) impugning the order of the trial court
dated ... application
under Order IX Rule 13 CPC filed by the appellants/defendants. By
the application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC
objection as the right to file written statement already stood closed vide order
23.05.2012 and the defendant was proceeded ex-parte on 05.09.2012,
therefore written ... court below has dismissed the application under
Order IX Rule 13 CPC finding that there is no sufficient cause for
condonation of delay
