SHINDA MASIH Vs. RAGHBIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant/petitioner is impugning order (Annexure P-5) dtd. 20/11/2018 passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Gurdaspur and order (Annexure P-7) dtd. 8/8/2022 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Gurdaspur, vide which application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC for setting aside ex-parte judgment and decree dtd. 9/2/2016 was dismissed.

(2.) Learned counsel inter alia contends that the courts below, while passing the above said impugned orders, failed to appreciate that the petitioner was neither served properly nor was he aware about the pendency of the suit in question. Still further, the petitioner had led ample evidence to substantiate his case of no proper service having been effected, however, it was erroneously ignored by both the Courts below. Learned counsel has urged that the petitioner is an illiterate person, who had been erroneously attributed the knowledge qua the pendency of the suit in question. He urged that it did not appeal to prudence that the petitioner, even though knowing that he had a good case on merits, would intentionally fail to appear and contest the suit in question. It was also contended that it is settled principle of law that no person should be condemned unheard and the suit must be decided on merits after affording due opportunity of hearing to both the parties and more so, in the case in hand, as respondent No.1 in his crossexamination categorically deposed that he would have no objection if the petitioner had contested the case.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the relevant material on record.