RAJINDER SINGH Vs. GURMAIL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity "the Code") is directed against the order dated 3.8.2001 passed by the Additional District Judge, Rupnagar dismissing the appeal of the defendant-petitioner against the order dated 2.8.1999. In the order dated 2.8.1999, the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rupnagar has declined the application of the defendant-petitioner for setting aside the ex-parte judgment and decree dated 23.12.1996 passed in Civil Suit No. 138/24.5.1996.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the plaintiff-respondent filed Civil Suit No. 138 on 24.5.1996 against the defendant-petitioner for a recovery of sum of Rs. 30,250/-. The basis of the suit was a promissory note which was executed by the defendant-petitioner. The suit was decreed ex parte on 23.12.1996 in favour of the plaintiff-respondent.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner, Shri Hardip Singh has argued that onus to prove signature on the summons should have been placed on the plaintiff- respondent and the trial Court as well as the appellate Court committed a grave error in law by placing the onus on the defendant-petitioner. He has further urged that the summons should have been issued by registered AD post as is provided by the provisions of Order 5 Rule 19A of the Code (as the provision stood at that time). His last submission is that the summons did not accompany the copy of the plaint.