BIMLA WATI SHARMA Vs. STATE BANK OF PATIALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The brief facts relevant for the disposal of this revision petition against the order dated 14/01/1991, of the Subordinate Judge 1st Class, Nabha, are as follows:

(2.) Mr. J. C. Nagpal, learned counsel for the petitioner, has contended that Smt. Bimla Wati Sharma was not served in the suit. According to the learned counsel the petitioner is entitled to have the ex parte proceedings set aside and be relegated to the stage of her appearance in the Court in response to the service of summons.

(3.) The contention of Mr. J. S. Narang, learned counsel for the respondent-Bank, on the other hand, is that the petitioner is wife of Sham Lal Sharma and mother of respondents 3 to 5. She was living along with the aforesaid persons. A number of attempts were made to effect service on her. She had adequate notice of the suit and of the various dates fixed therein and on more than one occasion, summons was tendered to her and she declined to accept the same on the ground that the summons was not accompanied by a copy of the plaint. According to the learned counsel, the non-furnishing of a copy of the plaint along with the summons was a mere irregularity and the trial Court was justified in dismissing the petitioner's application.