DEVA RAM Vs. RAJENDRA KUMAR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals are directed against the order dtd.20.7.2004 passed by the learned Additional Dist. Judge (Fast Track) No. 2, Sirohi rejecting the application of the Defendant purchaser under Order 9 Rule 13 Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside the ex parte decree dtd.28.7.2003 in a suit for specific performance filed by the Plaintiff - Respondent Rajendra Kumar.

(2.) THE learned Counsel for the Defendant - Appellant submitted that summons of the suit after the purchasers were added as Defendants in the said suit were not served on the Defendants -purchasers, but were served on the predecessor in title, the vendor, therefore, the said service could not be treated as sufficient and the application under Order 9 Rule 13 Code of Civil Procedure deserves to be allowed, whereas the learned trial Court has wrongly rejected the said application and upheld the ex parte decree against them.

(3.) HAVING heard the learned Counsel and upon perusal of the reasons given in the impugned order, this Court is satisfied that the reasons given by the learned trial Court in dismissing the application under Order 9 Rule 13 Code of Civil Procedure are not sufficient and germane and therefore, the present appeal deserves to be allowed.