MALWINDER KAUR Vs. KULDEEP SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition is directed against the order dated 06.12.2017 (Annexure P-4), whereby, an application under Order 6, Rule 14- A of Civil Procedure Code, moved by petitioner-defendant No. 1, has been rejected.

(2.) Mr. Ravinder Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner-defendant No. 1 has drawn the attention of this Court to the memo of parties of impugned order dated 06.12.2017 (Annexure P-4) to submit that the Court should not have issued the notice to other party in the absence of any compliance of aforementioned provisions which is mandatory requirement of law, for the purpose of entertaining the suit. Since the Court below has rejected the application on the ground that the defendants have appeared, therefore, the application was not maintainable. He submitted that assuming for an argument sake, in case decision of the suit is either way, aggrieved party would file the appeal with the same memo of parties and the problem would again arise.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for petitioner-defendant No. 1, appraised the paper book and of the view that the aforementioned apprehension expressed by Mr. Sharma is fair and justified. For the sake of brevity, provisions of Order 6, Rule 14-A CPC read as under:-