Setting aside decree ex-parte against defendant on the basis of sufficient cause-What is Sufficient Cause

Sufficient Cause” is an expression which has been used in large number of Statutes. The meaning of the word “sufficient” is “adequate” or “enough”, in as much as may be necessary to answer the purpose intended. Therefore, word “sufficient” embraces no more than that which provides a platitude which when the act done suffices to accomplish the purpose intended in the facts and circumstances existing in a case and duly examined from the view point of a reasonable standard of a cautious man.

Triloki Nath Singh vs Anirudh Singh (d) Thr. Lrs & Ors-06/05/2020


Whether the decree passed on a compromise can be challenged by the stranger to the proceedings in a separate suit?

The appellant could file a suit for protection of his right, title or interest devolved on the basis of the stated sale deed dated 6th January, 1984, allegedly executed by one of the party (Sampatiya) to the proceedings in the partition suit, which could be examined independently by the Court on its own merits in accordance with law.

Judgment and Decrees: Delhi High Court Rules for Subordinate Civil Courts

In Appellate Courts, the language used in filling in the decretal order, shall conform to the action recognized by the law, and shall direct that the decree of the lower Courts be either “affirmed”, “varied”, “set aside” or “reversed”. In each case in which a decree is affirmed, the terms thereof shall be recited, so as to make the appellate decretal order complete in itself. In varying a decree, the relief granted, in lieu of that originally granted shall, be fully and accurately set out. Where a decree is reversed on appeal, the consequential relief granted to the successful party shall similarly be stated. Every decretal order shall be so worded as to be capable of execution without reference to any other document, and so as to create no difficulty of interpretation.

In a partition suit, Court has jurisdiction to amend shares suitably, even if preliminary decree has been passed

If the preliminary decree passed in the present proceedings without complying with the provisions of Order 32 Rule 7(1) is not a nullity but is only voidable at the instance of the appellants, the question is; can they seek to avoid it by preferring an appeal against the final decree? It is in dealing with this point that the bar of Section 97 of the Code is urged against the appellants. Section 97 which has been added in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for the first time provides that where any party aggrieved by a preliminary decree passed after the commencement of the Code does not appeal from such decree he shall be precluded from disputing its correctness in any appeal which may be preferred from the final decree