GULZAR SINGH Vs. JAIPAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant-Petitioner has invoked supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 28.9.2010 passed by Trial Court as well as order dated 11.11.2010 passed by Appellate Court thereby rejecting the application moved by the Defendant (Petitioner herein) for setting aside ex-parte judgment and decree dated 11.5.2010 under Order 9 Rule 13 Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) The brief facts of the present case are that Plaintiff-Respondent has filed suit against Defendant-Petitioner. Defendant-Petitioner was duly served and he has put in his appearance through his counsel on 2.9.2008. On the request of learned Counsel for the Defendant-Petitioner, case was adjourned for 7.10.2008 for filing written statement and reply to the injunction application. Undisputedly on 7.10.2008 again written statement and reply on behalf of the Defendant was not filed and case was adjourned for 13.1.2009 subject to payment of cost of Rs. 100/-. On 13.1.2009, no written statement and reply was filed and once again case was adjourned to 17.3.2009. On 17.3.2009 also no written statement and reply to injunction application was filed, hence, Court has directed to strike off defence of the Defendant and directed ex-parte proceedings against the Defendant. After 17.3.2009 case was listed on several dates and ex-parte evidence of Plaintiff was recorded, however, no application under Order 9 Rule 7 Code of Civil Procedure was moved. Ultimately case was decreed vide ex-parte judgment and decree dated 11.5.2010. Present application under Order 9 Rule 13 Code of Civil Procedure was filed on 7.9.2010 which was dismissed by both the Courts below having observed that no reason has been assigned in the application to remain absent on 17.3.2009 and thereafter on several dates when case was fixed time to time.