มาตรา 199 เบญจ — การวินิจฉัยคำขอพิจารณาคดีใหม่

คำแปลภาษาไทย

When the court has received an application for a new trial, the court may, if it thinks fit, order a stay of execution beforehand. In such a case, the court shall notify the execution officer of the order.
In considering the application for a new trial, if there is reason to believe that the default of answer was not intentional or that there was reasonable cause, and the court is of the opinion that the grounds stated in the application show that the applicant may have a chance of winning the case, and, where the application was filed late, that the applicant filed it within the prescribed period, the court shall issue an order granting the application. In such a case, if there is an appeal or a further appeal against the judgment or order adjudicating the party in default of answer the losing party, the court shall also notify the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court, as the case may be, of that order.
When the court has issued an order granting the application for a new trial under paragraph two, the court's judgment or order rendered by default of answer, and any other judgment or order of the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court in the same case, together with the measures of execution already carried out, shall be deemed to be revoked as a matter of course, and the court shall notify the execution officer. However, if it is impossible to restore the parties to their former position as before the execution, or where the court is of the opinion that it is not necessary to do so, then, for the benefit of the parties or of third persons, the court shall have the power to make any order it thinks fit; and the court shall then try that case anew from the time the defendant fell into default of answer, requiring the defendant to file an answer within such period as the court thinks fit.
An order of the court granting a new trial shall be final. However, where the court issues an order refusing the application, the applicant may appeal against that order, and the judgment of the Court of Appeal shall be final.
If the defendant was in default of answer intentionally or without reasonable cause, thereby causing the other party to incur costs more than it should have, the costs so increased shall be deemed to be unnecessary costs within the meaning of Section 166.

⚠︎ คำแปลนี้ยังไม่เป็นที่ทราบจากสำนักงาน — กรุณาอ้างอิงตัวบทภาษาไทยเป็นหลัก