ASHUTOSH SHROTRIYA Vs. RAIS UDDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant-applicant has filed the present Civil Revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'the Code') with the prayer that the Revision be allowed and the order dated 10th April 1991 passed by XI Additional District Judge, Agra, rejecting the application of the defendant-applicant to set aside the ex parte order dated 27th April, 1987, passed in Suit No. 36 of 1981 to proceed ex parte and also the order dismissing the earlier restoration application, be set aside.

(2.) THE case appears to have chequered history. A suit for ejectment and arrears of rent was filed by the plaintiff-opposite party and the defendant- applicant appears to have been served with the summons to appear in Court. He did appear on some of the dates fixed in the suit, but on 27th April, 1987, he did not appear and the order to proceed ex parte was passed and thereafter the case was transferred to the Court of XI Additional District Judge from the Court of District Judge, but the notice about this transfer was not served on the defendant-applicant. However, an application to set aside the ex parte order dated 27th April, 1987 was moved, but the same was dismissed in default. Thereafter, another application was filed to the same effect, but that was also dismissed by the impugned order dated 10th April, 1991. To set aside these orders, the present Civil Revision has been filed.

(3.) SHRI Shashi Nandan, learned counsel for the applicant urged that the order of the Court below to proceed ex parte dated 27th April, 1987 having been passed under Rule 6 of Order IX if the Code does not prevent the defendant from participating in further proceedings and the expression 'the suit be heard ex parte' does not mean that the suit is to be decided ex parte on merits. It simply means that the hearing may proceed ex parte and the object of the legislature is not to prevent the defendant from participating in the proceedings.