(1.) Heard Sri Ravi Kiran Jain, Senior Advocate, assisted by Deeba Siddiquee, Advocate on behalf of the petitioner.
(2.) Original Suit No. 10 of 2000, instituted by the petitioner against the respondents to the present writ petition before the Judge Small Causes, was decreed ex parte on 31.10.2001. The judgment debtor filed an application under Order IX Rule13 for recall of the ex parte order. For compliance of the requirement of Section 17 proviso to the Small Causes Courts Act, the father of the defendant furnished his surety for satisfaction of the ex parte decree. This application was objected by the petitioner and he made an application (Paper No. 17-C) stating therein that acceptance of the surety of the father of the defendant to the suit in the facts of the case was unjustified and even otherwise illegal. This application of the landlord (Paper No. 17-C was rejected under the order dated 06th May, 2005 by the concerned court. The order has been permitted to become final and was not subjected to challenge by the petitioner landlord. Meaning thereby that the surety of the father of the defendant was found to be to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
(3.) The application under Order IX Rule 13 thereafter gave up for consideration before the trial court. The trial court by means of the order dated 27.02.2009 rejected the application under Order IX Rule 13 only on the ground that it was barred by limitation, after rejecting the application made under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.