My darkhast dismissed under order 9 rule 3 (none was present) therefore I have filed application to restore the same under order 9 rule 4, with the application to condone delay of 100 days, which is calculated from the day of dismissal.
Actually in Darkhast Proceeding every step was completed by both the parties. Lastly both parties had filed their written argument also, therefore, actually it was expected the court should pass the order but in spite of that the Executing Court dismiss the darkhast for the reason mentioned above.
I came to know (after filing application as mentioned above) that the the period is calculated from the date of knowledge or obtaining the certified copies. (omitting the period in between filing of application till receiving of copies)
If above statement (Col.No.2) is true then I have filed 15 days before the expiry of the limitation of 30 days. Therefore no need to file delay condonation application and at the time of proceeding, I should not press the same. Pl comment
While typing the draft of restoration application and application of delay condonation, it is observed today that, there are few grammatical and typing errors and two three sentence does not address correctly and one event slipped to add by mistake. The same has to be corrected.
Notice with the copy of restoration application to opposite party yet not issued due to less office staff in court.
Now My Questions:
In view of dismissal of Darkhast, how to calculate the period, whether from date of dismissal OR date of knowledge OR date of obtaining certified copies.
FOR above reply I NEED CITATION To SUBMIT BEFORE COURT, if your reply is “From the date of knowledge OR date of obtaining Certified Copies.
To correct the draft (as mentioned in above Col. 4) whether I should withdraw the application of restoration and application of delay condonation with the permission of court to file a fresh both applications.
If I withdraw both the application then which section or order will be applicable. (Order 23 rule 4 says that “nothing in this order shall apply to any proceedings in execution of a decree or order”) According to me it should be order 23 rule 1 will be applicable while withdrawing the applications.
IF I withdraw both applications the whether limitation law will attract again while filing the fresh applications or the it will not count the new period viz. The period involved in “From the date of filing of earlier application till the date of filing the fresh application”).
Instead of withdrawing whether I should file application for amendment by correcting the grammatical and typing errors etc. Few of serious errors has to be corrected.
Application for Amendment when to be filed (before notice issued to opposite party as stated above in Col No. 5 OR after opposite party appears in the said matter.
After completion of both side arguments, the court would have passed the Order, which did not. Pl comment.
Asked 5 years ago in Civil Law
Please inform the citation in this regards in view of Darkhast dismissed under order 9 rule 3 regarding period of limitation starts from date of obtaing the Certified copies, so also please try to reply my other questions, mentioned in previous post. Thank you.
Asked 5 years ago
All advocates are requested to reply my all questions as it is very much necessary to safeguard my Darkhast. I can pay for the same.
the order of the executing court is as below:
"Today the decree holder and his Advocate are absent. Since long the parties failed to take effective steps. Even today no one appeared for or on behalf of both the parties and no effective steps are taken to proceed with the matter. Therefore, it seems that the parties are not interested to proceed with the matter. The matter is pending since year 2012. No fruitful purpose would serve by keeping matter pending. Hence, this Darkhast stands dismissed."
If you read the above Order, it is clear that, the EP is dismissed under order 9 rule 3 (which states - none present) and not under order 21 rule 105 - sub rule 2 (which states the applicant does not appear) sub rule 3 (which states the applicant appears and opposite party does not appear).
Therefore I have filed restoration application along with delay condonation of 107 days, calculating from the day of dismissal till the day of filing (omitting the period wasted in obtaing the Certified copies). Now I came to understand that if my calculation would have been either from the date of knowledge or from the date of obtaining copies, then there was no necessity to file delay condonation being my restoration application file before expiry of 30 days.
I asked you citation in view of order 9 rule 3 and 4 (in darkhast) so that I can put the said citation before executing court and will not press my delay condonation application.
Next was regarding the withdraw the darkhast to correct some technical errors or instead of amendment but still I have not received the reply on same and when to amend because notice till date not served on opposite party.
If your suggestion would be for withdraw and file fresh darkhast then order 23 rule 1 whether it is applicable in Darkhast Proceeding.
Ok read tis wit earlier questions
Asked 5 years ago
