New Delhi: The Supreme Court has referred to a larger Bench the question of whether a third party to a civil decree can maintain an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to set aside an ex parte decree.
A two-Judge Bench comprising Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice K. Vinod Chandran made the reference while hearing a Special Leave Petition arising from a judgment of the Madras High Court dated July 3, 2019.
The Court observed that the issue raised in the case had been considered earlier; however, two decisions rendered by coordinate Benches of the Supreme Court are inconsistent with each other. In Raj Kumar v. Sardari Lal & Ors. (2004) 2 SCC 601, the Court held that a third party to a decree can maintain an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
However, a later judgment in Ram Prakash Agarwal & Anr. v. Gopi Krishan (Dead) through LRs (2013) 11 SCC 296 held to the contrary, without referring to the earlier judgment in Raj Kumar v. Sardari Lal.
The Court was informed that subsequent judgments followed the view taken in Sardari Lal (supra), but again without noting the later decision in Ram Prakash Agarwal (supra).
Noting the legal conundrum arising from the conflict between the two coordinate Bench decisions, the Court observed that it would be proper and appropriate for the issue to be settled comprehensively, and once and for all, by a larger Bench so as to give quietus to the controversy.
Accordingly, the Court directed that the matter be placed before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders on referring the case to a larger Bench in light of the conflict between the decisions.
The status quo order dated July 15, 2019, shall continue to operate until the next hearing.
Appearances:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Raghenth Basant, Senior Advocate; Mr. A. Karthik, AOR; Ms. Smrithi Suresh, Advocate; Mr. Sugam Agrawal, Advocate; Ms. Hima Bhardwaj, Advocate
For the Respondent: Ms. N. S. Nappinai, Senior Advocate; Mr. V. Balaji, Advocate; Mr. C. Kannan, Advocate; Mr. Nizamuddin, Advocate; Mr. B. Dhananjay, Advocate; Ms. Vidushi Aggarwal, Advocate; Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, AOR
Case Title: N. Rajaram v. R. Murali & Ors.
