ARIF NISA Vs. ABDUL MUTALIF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner/Plaintiff has filed the instant Civil Revision Petition as against the order dated 29.09.2009 in I.A. No. 413 of 2009 in O.S. No. 289 of 2008 passed by the Learned Principal District Munsif, Erode. The Learned Principal District Munsif, while passing orders in I.A. No. 413 of 2009 in O.S. No. 289 of 2008 on 29.09.2009, has, among other things, observed in para 14 to the effect that '.... In the case on hand, this Court already has come to the conclusion that the Petitioner was not served with the summons and he came to know about the decree only on 27.05.2009 etc.', and resultantly, allowed the application without costs.

(2.) IT is not in dispute that the Respondent/Defendant filed I.A. No. 413 of 2009 in O.S. No. 289 of 2008 on the file of the Learned Principal District Munsif, Erode praying for an issuance of an order by the Court in setting aside the Exparte Decree dated 21.07.2008 and to provide him an opportunity to defend the main action to expose the falsities of the aforesaid case.

(3.) ON going through the order passed by the trial Court in I.A. No. 413 of 2009 in O.S. No. 289 of 2008, this Court observes that the trial Court, in paragraph 12 of its order, has, among other things, mentioned that '... In view of the above submissions made on either side, while perusing the case records, the alleged summons and the notice issued to the petitioner through court were found missing. Therefore, this Court could not come to the conclusion that the summons issued by the Court were originally served upon the Petitioner'. Strangely, the trial Court, in paragraph 14 of its order in I.A. No. 413 of 2009, has categorically held that '... In the case on hand, this Court has already come to the conclusion that the Petitioner was not served with the summons and he came to know about the decree only on 27.05.2009 etc.,'.