SAT NARAIN Vs. ROHIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. Petitioners had filed an ejectment petition under Section 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, before the Rent Controller. The petition ended in ex parte order of ejectment on 28.2.1998. The respondent filed an application for setting aside the ex parte order before the learned Civil Judge (JD) Karnal. The said application was allowed. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners have filed the present revision petition.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has raised the following two points:-

(3.) Regarding, the first point there was an endorsement on the summons that the respondent had refused and the same were affixed on the outer door of his premises and hence the order was passed for proceeding ex parte against the respondent. The provision regarding service of summons appears in Order 5 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code), which reads thus:-