FATIMA KHATOON Vs. SWARUP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Thus Rule obtained on a revisional application raises a short point as to whether a Court setting aside an ex parte decree under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Code can restore back possession to the judgment-debtor who in the meantime had been dispossessed in execution of such an ex parte decree.

(2.) The facts are not in dispute. The present petitioner before us obtained an ex parte decree against the opposite party in an ejectment suit and recovered possession in execution thereof. In the meantime the opposite party filed an application under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code. That application succeeded and the ex parte decree- was set aside.

(3.) In view of the fact that the decree had been so set aside the opposite party filed an application under Section 144 read with Section 151 of the Code for restitution. This was opposed by the plaintiff petitioner. All his objections being overruled, the learned Judge, 5th Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta by the order impugned dated June 7, 1983 passed in Misc. Case No. 234 of 1980 directed restitution in favour of the opposite party. Feeling aggrieved the petitioner has preferred the present revisional application.