KULWANT KAUR Vs. SHISHA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision-petition is directed against the order dated 20.04.2009, rendered by the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) Sangrur, vide which it accepted the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for setting aside the ex parte judgment and decree dated 14.09.2005 and ex parte proceedings order dated 10.06.2005.

(2.) KULWANT Kaur, filed a suit for maintenance under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act against Shisha Singh respondent, her husband. The evidence was led in that suit by the plaintiff as well as the defendant. When the case was fixed for rebuttal evidence the Counsel for the defendant/respondent pleaded no instructions and the defendant/respondent was proceeded against ex parte. Ultimately, an ex parte decree dated 14.09.2005 granting maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1200/- per month from 24.09.1998 to 23.09.1999 was passed by the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sangrur. It was also directed that the charge on the property of Shisha Singh in respect of the maintenance, granted in favour of Kulwant Kaur was created.

(3.) IN reply to the application, the plaintiff/respondent pleaded that the application was not maintainable as after the parties closed their evidence, it was for the Court to go through the file and pronounce the judgment. It was stated that the judgment and decree dated 14.09.2005, therefore, could be treated to have been pronounced on merits and not ex parte. It was further stated that once the Counsel for the defendant pleaded no instructions on his behalf there was no necessity to issue notice to him as there is no legal provision in that regard. It was further stated that the theory of defendant was concocted.