Court Reaffirms That Non-Appearance Under Section 115 CPC Warrants Dismissal for Default; Madras High Court Single-Judge Ruling Binding on Parties
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | C.R.P.(NPD).No.3262 of 2017 of S. Prabakaran Vs A.R. Govardhan |
| CNR | HCMA011870092017 |
| Decision Date | 03-09-2021 |
| Disposal Nature | Dismissed for default |
| Judgment Author | V.M. Velamani, J. |
| Court | High Court of Judicature at Madras |
| Bench | Single Judge |
| Type of Law | Civil Procedure (Section 115 CPC) |
| Ratio Decidendi | When a petitioner fails to appear at a scheduled hearing and again when the matter is called ‘for dismissal’, the court is entitled to dismiss the petition for default. |
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- On 01-09-2021, the matter was taken up for hearing and there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner; the court directed the matter to be posted under the caption “for dismissal.”
- On 03-09-2021, again there was no representation for the petitioner.
- In view of non-appearance at two consecutive hearings, the court exercised its procedural power under Section 115 CPC to dismiss the Civil Revision Petition for default.
Statutory Analysis
- The petition was filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
- The court applied the inherent procedural power to dismiss for non-appearance, emphasizing strict adherence to hearing schedules prescribed under the CPC.