MALTI Vs. KALYAN SINGH & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision petition has been filed against the order dated 7.3.2005 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Karnal vide which the application filed by respondents No. 1 to 4 herein for setting aside exparte decree has been allowed.

(2.) THE respondents No. 1 to 4 herein were proceeded ex parte on 4.1.1999. This was on account of the fact that the respondents had filed another reference qua the same land under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, which was pending in the same Court. The Court on different stages expressed its view that both the references should be heard and decided together. It was on account of pendency of two references in the same Court that the respondents did not come to know about the ex parte proceedings taken out against them.

(3.) THE respondents No. 1 to 4 sought stay of reference filed by respondent No. 15 herein on the ground that the reference filed by the respondents No. 1 to 4 herein has been answered in their favour ex parte. The said application was dismissed on 6.3.2004 against which the said respondents filed a revision petition No. 1567 of 2004. The said application was dismissed by observing as under :-