AHMED TEA CO (PVT ) LTD Vs. MANJEET KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. J. Patowary, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner (plaintiff). Also heard Ms. R. Devi, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents (tenants).

(2.) THE Title Suit No.97/2006 was filed for ejectment of the tenant from the tenanted premises measuring 24' x 60' under municipality Holding No.273 (old) and 299 (new) of Graham Bazar, Ward No.17 of Dibrugarh municipality. The plaintiff pleaded rent default since February, 1978 and also bonafide requirement. According to the pleaded case the tenant was inducted in the year 1961 and Rs.70/ - was the monthly rent payable for the premises, where the predecessor of the present respondents was operating a furniture shop in the style of Bhogal Furniture. However, the defendant failed to appear in the Court and accordingly the learned Munsiff No.1, Dibrugarh proceeded to hear the matter ex -parte. The Trial Judge then considered the evidence of PW -1 and the Exbts. -1, 2 and 3 from where it was gathered that the defendant was a tenant under the plaintiff and that the tenant failed to pay the due rent. Accordingly the ejectment suit was decreed ex -parte on 28.09.2006 (Annexure -1) by the learned Trial Court.

(3.) THE aggrieved defendant then filed an application on 26.10.2006 (Annexure -2) under Order IX Rule 13 read with Section 151 of the CPC for setting aside the ex -parte decree passed on 28.09.2006. In his application the defendant pleaded that he never received any summon from the Court and learnt of the proceeding only on 28.09.2006 from his neighbour Jogendar Singh, a cotenant under the plaintiff. The plaintiff opposed to the defendant's application, where they contended that the plaintiff was served with summon, but he deliberately kept away from the proceeding.