CHHOTU RAM Vs. RAJ PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is defendant's revision directed against the order dt. 15.5.1992 passed by learned Dist. Judge Udaipur in Civil misc. application No. 28/91.

(2.) Brief facts giving rise to this revision are that an ex parte decree was passed by the learned court below on 27.9.1989 against the defendant-petitioner. An application has been Filed by the petitioner under O. 37 R. 4 C.P.C. read with S. 151 on 12.2.1991 alongwith an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act supported by an affidavit. After hearing both the parties and considering the material on record and case law, the court below dismissed the petitioner's application dt. 12.2.1991 on 15.5.1992 against which the defendant-petitioner has filed this revision.

(3.) It was argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Mehta that there was no proper service of summons was effected on the petitioner as required under section 5 C.P.C. as the summons did not contain copy of the plaint. He has also argued that there was sufficient cause for not appearing in the suit as the defendant had no knowledge of it, so his application should have been allowed, and the court has acted without jurisdiction with material irregularity in dismissing the application.