Surinder Singh vs Bal Krishan And Others on 7 July, 2026

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Surinder Singh vs Bal Krishan And Others on 7 July, 2026

Author: Rajnesh Oswal

Bench: Rajnesh Oswal

                                                                            2026:JKLHC-JMU:1955
                                                                    Serial No. 145

     HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                                AT JAMMU
CM (M) No. 139/2026 in
CM No. 4351/2026

Surinder Singh                                   .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
                      Through: Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate.

                 vs
Bal Krishan and others                                     ..... Respondent(s)
                      Through: Mr.

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE
                                 ORDER

07.07.2026

1. The petitioner has invoked Article 227 of the Constitution of India for

SPONSORED

the purpose of assailing the order dated 02.06.2026 passed by the court

of learned Additional District Judge, Kathua (for short the ‘Trial

Court’), in a suit titled “Surinder Singh vs. Bal Krishan and others“,

whereby the learned trial court has set aside the ex-parte proceedings

initiated against the respondents, on the ground that there was no

sufficient material before the learned trial court to pass the order

impugned.

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

3. In terms of Order 9 Rule 7 CPC, when the defendant causes

appearance before the court after he is set ex-parte and demonstrates

good cause for his non-appearance on the previous date of hearing, the

court may set-aside the ex-parte proceedings initiated against him.
2 CM (M) No. 139/2026

2026:JKLHC-JMU:1955

4. So far as the present case is concerned, the specific plea taken by the

respondents was that they were being represented by their counsel and

on account of demise of father of the counsel, he could not cause

appearance before the learned trial court, when the respondents were

set ex-parte. Initially there was no affidavit in support of the

application, but subsequently, the affidavit was also filed by the

respondents in support of the application.

5. The learned trial court considered the cause demonstrated by the

respondents for their non-appearance on the date when they were set

ex-parte as good cause and set aside the ex-parte proceedings initiated

against the respondents.

6. This Court does not find that the learned trial court has committed any

jurisdictional error resulting in miscarriage of justice to the petitioner,

as such, the present petition is found to be misconceived and the

same is accordingly disposed of, along with the connected

application.

(RAJNESH OSWAL)
JUDGE

Jammu
07.07.2026
Sahil Padha