ALIKE VENKATRAMANA Vs. POKALA JAYALAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order dated 30-10-1996 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Peddapuram, wherein the court below dismissed I.A.No. 17 of 1987 in O.S.No. 13 of 1986, a petition under Order IX Rule 13 C.P.C.

(2.) The respondents herein filed the above suit. In the said suit, as the appellants herein were absent, they were set ex parte on 16-4-1986. Subsequently on 3-7-1986, an ex parte decree was passed as prayed for in favour of the respondents herein. Against the said ex parte decree, the appellants have chosen to file an application under Order IX Rule 13 C.P.C. and as there was delay of 23 days in filing the said application, they also filed I.A.No. 1090 of 1986 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The court below accepted the reasons for the delay and accordingly allowed I.A.No. 1090 of 1986 by its order dated 19-1-1987 on imposing terms. Thereafter, the present petition i.e., (LA. No. 17 of 1987) which was filed under Order IX Rule 13 C.P.C., was numbered. But the court below refused to set aside the ex parte decree and accordingly dismissed the said LA. Hence, this appeal.

(3.) It is mainly contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that though sufficient reasons are shown for their absence on 3-7-1986, supported by medical evidence, the court below refused to set aside the ex parte decree. Learned counsel states that the court below ought to have given an opportunity to the appellants to pursue the matter on its merits.