P.C. JAIN Vs. VIMLA JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order dated 30.11.1999 in M.J.C. No. 11/98 by VI Addl. District Judge, Raipur, whereby the application under Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C., for setting aside ex parte judgment and decree in Civil Suit No. 82-B/95, was dismissed.

(2.) The respondent/plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 1,72,482.00 against the defendant/appellant. The defendant/appellant was represented by Counsels including Mr. Khakharia, Mr. Parekh and Mr. Khan. Several dates for evidence were fixed in the case and part of the evidence was also recorded. On 1.4.1998 the case was fixed for evidence of the parties on 6.7.1998. On the said date, i.e. on 6.7.1998 none appeared for the defendant/appellant. Hence, ex parte proceedings were conducted, and the judgment and decree was passed on 13.7.1998.

(3.) The defendant/appellant filed an application under Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C. on 5.8.1998 for setting aside the ex parte judgment and decree. The defendant/appellant averred in the said application that his Counsel Mr. Sudeep Johri was appearing for him, and that on 4,7.1998, the said Counsel Mr. Sudeep Johri proceeded to Jabalpur, and that he was at Jabalpur on 6.7.1998 also. It was also averred that the Counsel had erroneously noted the next date of hearing as 16.7.1998 instead of 6.7.1998. He further averred that thereafter there was strike of the Bar Association and, therefore, he came to know about the ex parte judgment and decree on 20.7.1998.