SHRI CHETAN & OTHERS Vs. SHRI NARAIN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants No.1 and 3 to 6 and legal representatives of defendant No.2 have filed the instant revision petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India assailing order dated 08.04.2010 (Annexure P-2) passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Faridabad thereby dismissing application of defendants filed under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short, Civil Procedure Code) for setting aside ex parte judgment and decree dated 30.08.2006 passed in Civil Suit instituted by respondent-plaintiff Narayan Singh against the defendants, along with order dated 16.09.2005 whereby defendants were proceeded ex parte in the suit, and also assailing judgment dated 12.05.2011 Annexure P-3 passed by learned District Judge, Faridabad thereby dismissing appeal preferred by the defendants against order Annexure P-2 of the trial Court.

(2.) Respondent-plaintiff instituted suit against petitioners No.1 to 5 and predecessor of petitioners No.6 to 8 alleging that Amar Singh father of all the defendants agreed to sell the suit land to plaintiff vide agreement dated 14.10.2004 for Rs. 3,62,500.00 (Rupees three lacs sixty two thousand five hundred) and received Rs. 3,12,500 (Rupees three lacs twelve thousand five hundred) as earnest money and executed agreement dated 14.10.2004 and possession of the suit land was also delivered to the plaintiff. On death of Amar Singh, defendants being his sons are his successors. The plaintiff sought specific performance of the aforesaid agreement along with permanent injunction restraining the defendants from dispossessing the plaintiff from the suit land and from alienating the same to anybody else.

(3.) Notice of the suit was issued to defendants who are all brothers. Notice was allegedly received by Usha wife of Kuldeep defendant No.3 on behalf of the defendants. Taking it to be valid service on family member of the defendants, the defendants were proceeded ex parte on 16.09.2005 because none appeared for them. The suit was decreed vide ex parte judgment (Annexure P-1) and decree dated 30.08.2006.