LAWS(P&H)-2006-5-543

AJMER KAUR Vs. BALDEV SINGH

Decided On May 01, 2006
AJMER KAUR Appellant
V/S
BALDEV SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, an order dated 8th March, 2006 (Annexure P-8) passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kharar, setting aside the order 22.2.2005 whereby the petitioner's suit was decreed ex parte, has been assailed.

(2.) A perusal of the order under challenge reveals that on 19.1.2005, an order was passed by the learned trial court adjourning the case for 21.1.2005 so as to enable the defendant to file reply to an application dated 4.12.2004 under section 151 CPC. On 21.1.2005, it appears that the case was called several times but since no one appeared on behalf of the defendant, he was proceeded against ex parte. Thereafter one more order was passed on that very day after 3.50 P.M. whereby plaintiff's three witnesses were examined and the case was adjourned for consideration on 22.2.2005. On the said adjourned date, the suit was decreed ex parte.

(3.) The respondent thereafter moved an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC for setting aside the ex parte decree. It was averred by him that he was under the bona fide impression that on 21.1.2005 the case was fixed for adjudication of the application dated 24.12.2004, which, in the absence of any reply by him, could at the best be allowed. Since the case was earlier not fixed for the plaintiff's evidence on the said date, he was under the bona fide impression that no witness would be examined. The respondent also came out with an explanation as to how and in what circumstances his counsel could not appear and defend him.