NANAK CHAND Vs. GOSWAMI PREETAM LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties. There is no force in this application. The suit for ejectment 'and arrears of rent was de creed ex parte against the defendant-applicant on 11-11-1968. On 25-2- 1969. an application under Order 9, Rule 13 Civil Procedure Code was filed by the applicant for setting aside the ex part decree. The trial court passed an order, the operative portion of which is as fol lows:-

(2.) IT was contended that since the applicant had committed default, the applicantion for setting aside the ex parte decree stood dismissed by the aforesaid order dated 17-5-1969 and the appeal filed before the court below was barred by limitation. The court below accepted the contention of the opposite party. It further held that the trial court was right in passing the aforesaid conditional order dated 17-5- 1969 and the application for setting aside the ex parte decree stood dismissed in view of the default of the applicant by that order itself. In Gaya Din v. Lalta Prasad, 1936 All WR 414 (AIR 1936 All 477) a Division Bench of this Court approved of an ear lier decision of this court in the case of Ahmad Hussain v. Har Dayal, ILR 48 All 199 = (AIR 1926 All 142 (2)) in which it was held that:-