AMIT PABUWAL Vs. ANAND SWAROOP GAUR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With the consent of learned counsels for the parties, the appeal is heard finally at the admission stage.

(2.) The present misc. appeal filed by the appellant -defendant under Order XLI II Rule 1(d) of C.P.C. arises out of the order dated 17.10.2013 passed by the Additional District Judge, Shahpura, District Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as "the trial court") whereby the trial court has dismissed the application being No. 2/2005 filed by the appellant -applicant under Order IX Rule 13 of C.P.C. for setting aside the ex -parte decree dated 28.01.2005 passed in the Civil Suit No. 11/2002, filed by the respondents -plaintiffs seeking specific performance of an oral agreement alleged to have been made by the appellant -defendant in respect of the suit lands and for damages.

(3.) The short facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the respondents -plaintiffs had filed the civil suit against the appellant -defendant seeking specific performance of the oral agreement allegedly made by the appellant somewhere in the year 2000. In the said suit, the trial court treating the service of summons to the appellant by a registered A.D. sent at the address of the appellant's business premises, as sufficient service, proceeded ex -parte against him and passed the decree on 28.01.2005. According to the appellant, he was never served with any summons either at his residential address or at his business address, and he came to know about the said ex -parte decree, only on 02.04.2005, when he received the notice of the Advocate Shri Ravi Shankar Agrawal of the respondents -decree holders. He, therefore, filed the application under Order IX Rule 13 for setting aside the ex -parte decree passed in the suit. The said application has been dismissed by the trial court vide the impugned order against which the present appeal has been filed.