RAMCHANDRA BABURAO JADHAV Vs. SHIVAJI RAMCHANDRA DHUMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the revision-applicant. None for the Respondents, though served. Perused the record.

(2.) To state in brief, the present applicant had filed Regular Civil Suit No.140 of 1982 against the respondents seeking specific performance of the contract for sale of certain agricultural land. Ex-parte decree in that suit was passed on 6.3.1987. On 26.2.1988, respondent No.1 filed Misc. Civil Application No.5 of 1988 under Order IX Rule 13 of C.P.C. for setting aside the exparte decree mainly on the ground that the suit summons was never served on him and the plaintiff had played fraud, had misled the Court and had obtained ex-parte decree against him.

(3.) The application was opposed by the plaintiff. After hearing the parties, the learned trial Court accepted the plea of defendant No.1-respondent and set aside the ex-parte decree in Regular Civil Suit No.140 of 1982 and restored the suit to the file. Being aggrieved by that order, the original plaintiff has preferred the present Revision Application.