JAI SINGH Vs. LAKHPAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ( ORAL )

(2.) THE present revision petition has been filed against the order dated 30.9.2004 passed by the learned Civil Judge ( Jr. Divn.), Karnal vide which application for setting aside the exparte decree has been allowed. THE case of the respondent-applicant was that no service was effected. In support of this contention he has produced Chowkidar, who has stated that no munadi was carried out and refusal report obtained by the petitioner was in fact signed by his son and, therefore, the learned Courts below disbelieved the report of refusal and on appreciation of evidence came to the conclusion that there were sufficient grounds for setting aside the ex parte decree and judgment as the respondent-defendant had not been served. THE learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the impugned order cannot be sustained as the refusal has been witnessed by the two witnesses and this fact has not been taken into consideration while holding that the report of refusal was not correct.