ARUN KUMAR Vs. SOHAN BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The present writ petition has been filed against the order dtd. 07/02/2018 passed by learned by Civil Judge, Dungla, whereby the application preferred under Order 9 Rule 7 of Civil Procedure Code was rejected.

(3.) The brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the respondent/plaintiffs filed a suit for permanent injunction against the petitioner and other co-defendant. The Trial Court issued summons to the respondents on 26/06/2012 and fixed the next date of appearance as 27/06/2012. The summons issued to the petitioner/defendant No. 6 Arun Kumar who is the present petitioner were refused on the ground that Arun Kumar is the adopted son of Nana Lal whereas in the summons it has been written Arun Kumar S/o. Manohar Lal. A report to that effect was also filed before learned trial Court. The petitioner did not choose to appear before learned trial Court and learned trial Court after giving reasonable opportunities, passed an order on 10/04/2013 to proceed against the petitioner/defendant No. 6 ex parte. The petitioner, in these circumstances, after lapse of about four years and five months preferred an application under Order 9 Rule 7 CPC for setting aside the order dtd. 10/04/2013, whereby the service upon the petitioner/defendant No. 6 was taken to have been completed and drawn the ex parte proceedings against him. This application was rejected by learned trial Court vide impugned order dtd. 07/02/2018.