Noting inconsistent rulings on the point, the Supreme Court has referred the issues of whether a third party to a decree is entitled to file an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for setting aside an ex parte decree, to a larger bench. The reference was made while hearing a Special Leave Petition against a Madras High Court judgment.
The Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice K. Vinod Chandran noted that there exists a clear conflict between two coordinate Bench decisions of the Supreme Court on the issue. While Raj Kumar v. Sardari Lal, (2004) 2 SCC 601, held that a third party to a decree can maintain an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC, a later judgment in Ram Prakash Agarwal v. Gopi Krishan, (2013) 11 SCC 296, took a contrary view without referring to the earlier decision.
The Court further noted that subsequent judgments have followed Sardari Lal without considering Ram Prakash Agarwal, thereby deepening the inconsistency. Observing that the legal position requires authoritative settlement “once and for all”, the Court directed that the matter be placed before the Chief Justice of India for reference to a larger Bench. In the meantime, the interim status quo order granted earlier was directed to continue.
Appearances
Petitioner – Mr. Raghenth Basant, Sr. Adv. Mr. A. Karthik, AOR Ms. Smrithi Suresh, Adv. Mr. Sugam Agrawal, Adv. Ms. Hima Bhardwaj, Adv.
Respondents – Ms. N. S. Nappinai, Sr. Adv. Mr. V. Balaji, Adv. Mr. C. Kannan, Adv. Mr. Nizamuddin, Adv. Mr. B. Dhananjay, Adv. Ms. Vidushi Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, AOR
