DURGASANKAR RATH Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD .

(2.) THIS Civil Revision has been filed by Defendant No.1 in Money Suit No.59 of 1989 of the Court to Sub -Judge, Boudh. He has challenged to the order of rejection of his application under Order 9 Rule 13, C.P.C. as per the impugned judgment dated 19.1.1994 in MJC No. 4 of 1993 of learned Sub -Judge, Boudh and the confirming judgment passed on 20.12.1996 by learned District Judge, Phulbani in Misc.Appeal No. 3 of 1994.

(3.) IN course of argument Mr. Patnaik, learned counsel for the petitioner, argues that in view of the ratio in the case of Hitesh Kumar Ojha and another v. Krushna Chandra Mahapatra, AIR 1992 Orissa 91, the whole proceeding taken in the Money Suit is vitiated because of non -compliance with the provision under Order 5 Rule 19 -A, C.P.C. and, therefore, on that ground alone the ex parte decree should have been set aside. Petitioner does not seek for an order of remand of the case for tendering supportive evidence in proof of the plea which he has taken.