CHHAGAN LAL ALIAS CHHAGAN MAL Vs. SURESH CHAUHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) UNDISPUTED facts of the case are that the plaintiffs- respondents filed a suit for eviction in respect of the disputed property against the defendants-petitioners in the trial Court in March, 1998, wherein service of summons on defendants was affected on 2nd July, 1998; after service of summons, on behalf of the defendants, Shri Sunil Kaushik, Advocate, filed his 'vakalatnama' in the trial Court on 2nd July, 1998, and sought for time to file written-statement. The case was adjourned from time to time till 23rd October, 1999 for filing written- statement, but, on that date, neither the defendants nor their counsel were present, therefore, the trial Court passed an ex- parte order against them and fixed the case for plaintiffs' evidence. Ultimately, the suit for eviction was decreed ex-parte by the trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 23rd March, 2000. The petitioners thereafter filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC for setting-aside the exparte decree in the trial Court on 31st May, 2000, which was contested by the plaintiffs. The trial Court dismissed the said application of the defendants vide order dated 23rd March, 2002. Thereafter, the defendants preferred an appeal, which was also dismissed by the appellate Court vide order dated 3rd September, 2004. Being aggrieved with the same, the defendants have preferred this writ petition before this Court challenging the aforesaid two orders passed by the Courts below.

(3.) I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties in the light of reasons assigned by both the Courts below and also perused the other documents annexed with the writ petition.