RAVINDER SALARIA Vs. VIBHAKAR SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent-landlords filed a petition for ejectment of the petitioners under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act. Notice of the said petition was issued for 28.2.1985. On the summons, it was reported by the Process Server that whereabouts of Raj Kumar were not known and the other respondents therein were residing in Delhi. On this report the learned Rent Controller ordered substituted service by beat of drum. But none appeared on behalf of the respondents. Consequently, ex parte proceedings were taken against them and an ex parte ejectment order was passed on 12.6.1985.

(2.) On coming to know of the ex parte order dated 12.6.1985, the tenants filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside the same, on 14.8.1985. The said application was dismissed by an order dated 9.4.1991 observing that no evidence was produced by the applicants therein that either on 13.12.1984 or in the month of August, 1985, they had deposited the arrears of rent in Court. It was also observed that the applicants (tenants) had knowledge of the institution of the petition for ejectment as they had deposited arrears of rent on 13.12.1984 in the Court of the Senior Subordinate Judge, Amritsar. It was thus, concluded that the said application was barred by time as the applicants therein had knowledge of the ejectment proceedings right from 13.12.1984.

(3.) It is against this order of the Rent Controller that the present revision has been filed.