MAYA MURMU Vs. RITU RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendants/appellants have impugned the judgment and decree passed -in Title Appeal No. 185/20 of 1976/79 by reason of which the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court have been reversed.

(2.) DURING the pendency of this appeal some of the appellants and respondents having died, their heirs and legal representatives were substituted.

(3.) WHILE admitting this appeal the following substantial question of law was formulated: (i) Whether having lost the Misc. Case arising out of an application field under Order IX, filed Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the suit for setting aside the ex -parte order was maintainable on the ground of fraudulant service of notice of the title suit? However, at the time of hearing it was admitted at the Bar that further points of law are required to be gone into which are as follows: (i) Whether in view of the absence of any averment atleast of the details of fraud in the plaint, the respondents could have succeeded in the suit? (ii) Whether the suit was barred by Limitation?