CHINDER KAUR Vs. NAZAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TERSELY , the facts and material, culminating in the commencement, relevant for deciding the instant revision petition and emanating from the record, are that, initially, respondent No.1 -plaintiff Nazar Singh s/o Midda Singh (for brevity "the plaintiff"), had instituted the civil suit for a decree of possession in respect of suit property against petitioner -defendant No.4 Chinder Kaur d/o Ujaggar Singh, her brothers Gurbachan Singh, Ginder Singh & Mela Singh and Hazura Singh s/o Bhag Singh defendants (for short "the defendants"). As the defendants did not appear and contest the suit despite service, therefore, the trial Court decreed the suit of plaintiff, vide judgment and decree dated 6.2.1992.

(2.) THEREAFTER , the petitioner -defendant No.4 kept silent and slept over the matter and it was on 11.11.1992, she moved an application for setting aside the ex parte decree under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC. The plaintiff refuted her prayer, filed the reply, stoutly denied all the allegations contained in the application and prayed for its dismissal.

(3.) SEQUELLY , the trial Court dismissed the application of petitionerdefendant No.4, for setting aside the ex parte decree, by means of impugned order dated 20.1.1997.