MOHAN Vs. KAMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant [hereinafter referred to as "the defendant"] has filed the present revision under Section 115 of CPC challenging the order dated 03.05.2016 passed in Civil Misc. Appeal No.4/2016 by First Additional District Judge, Barwani and order dated 12.01.2016 passed by Civil Judge, Class-I, Rajpur in MJC No.2/2014 by which the Court has refused to set-aside the ex-parte judgment and decree dated 29.09.2010.

(2.) Facts of the case are as under :-

(3.) Shri J.B.Mehta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant/defendant submits that the summon dated 29.07.2010 was never served, neither to the defendant nor his wife. The address given in the plaint is incomplete. The Process Server has submitted false report. The witnesses of the Panchnama has not been examined. The learned Court has wrongly adopted the procedure under Order V Rule 15, 17 and 19 of CPC. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance over the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushil Kumar Sabharwal v/s Gurpreet Singh, 2002 5 SCC 377.