Madhya Pradesh High Court Dismisses Appeal: Procedural Misstep in Civil Case

Court highlights procedural remedy under CPC for dismissal of application due to non-appearance

In a noteworthy decision, the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur, presided over by Justice Himanshu Joshi, has dismissed a misc. appeal filed by Smt. Sitarani challenging the dismissal of her application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC). The appeal was deemed not maintainable due to procedural grounds, emphasizing the importance of proper legal procedures in civil litigation.

The case originated from a suit filed by the respondent, Dal Singh, concerning possession of land, which led to an ex-parte judgment against Smt. Sitarani owing to her absence during the court proceedings. Seeking to overturn this judgment, Smt. Sitarani filed an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC to set aside the ex-parte decree. However, this application was dismissed in default due to the non-appearance of her counsel, prompting her to file an appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1 CPC.

Justice Joshi, in his judgment dated November 10, 2025, clarified that the appeal is barred by statutory provisions as well as established principles of law. The court underscored that the dismissal of an application due to default is procedural and does not adjudicate the substantive rights of the parties involved. Therefore, the appropriate recourse for Smt. Sitarani is to seek the restoration of her application under Order IX Rule 4 CPC, read with Section 151 CPC, before the same court, rather than filing an appeal.

The judgment referenced significant case law, including the Supreme Court's decision in Jaswant Singh v. Parkash Kaur, which elucidated that appeals are substantive rights and not procedural, reinforcing that specific statutory provisions must confer the right to appeal. The court ruled that the restoration of the dismissed application should be pursued as the dismissal was procedural and did not resolve the underlying rights of the parties.

The ruling serves as a crucial reminder to litigants and legal practitioners about adhering to procedural protocols and the hierarchy of remedies within the legal framework. It highlights the necessity of understanding procedural aspects of the law to avoid unnecessary appeals and to utilize appropriate remedies effectively. As a result, Smt. Sitarani has been advised to pursue the restoration of her application in the trial court to ensure her case is heard on merits.

Bottom Line:

Appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1 CPC against dismissal of an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC in default is not maintainable - Remedy lies in seeking restoration of the application before the same court under Order IX Rule 4 CPC read with Section 151 CPC.

Statutory provision(s): Order IX Rule 13 CPC, Order XLIII Rule 1 CPC, Order IX Rule 4 CPC, Section 151 CPC

Smt. Sitarani v. Dal Singh, (Madhya Pradesh)(Jabalpur) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2810682