Madan Lal Deceased Th.Legal Heirs Soma Devi And ANR. v. Hira Lal & ORS.

-1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision.28.07.2016 Madan Lal deceased through his LRs .......Petitioners Vs.

Hira Lal and others ........Respondents

Present:

Mr. S.S. Khurana, Advocate for the petitioners.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL 1.

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?

2.

To be referred to the Reporters or not ?

3.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? -.- AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL) The petitioners-plaintiffs are aggrieved of the impugned order passed by the lower Appellate Court whereby the ex parte judgment and decree dated 11.10.2003 passed by the trial Court has been set aside, by reversing the order passed by the trial Court whereby the application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC for setting aside the ex parte judgment and decree was dismissed.

Mr. S.S. Khurana, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that after the passing the judgment and decree, the property had been sold/exchanged many hands, the details of which are given hereunder:- "1. Sold by the petitioners-plaintiffs vide sale deed vasika No.1262 dated 26.05.2005 to Ravi Kant son of Tara Chand resident of 1779, Nai Basti Rewari-10 Marlas, `263,500/-, Mutation No.23897.

2. Sold by Ravi Kant vide sale deed Vasika No.8078 dated 04.01.2007 to Nirmala Devi daughter of Puran Chand Mohalla Nalapura, Narnaul, 10 Marlas, `10,50,000/-, Mutation

-2No.23898.

3. Sold by Nirmala Devi vide sale deed vasika No.7783 dated 19.03.2009 to Suman Lata wife of Abhay Singh resident of Shanti Vihar Delhi Road Rewari, 5 Marlas, `7,20,000/-, Mutation No.25444.

4. Sold by Nirmala Devi vide sale deed, Vasika No.18650 dated 20.03.2012 to Sushila Devi wife of Ramesh Kumar resident of Bawal T&D Bawal, 3 Marlas, `5,50,000/-, Mutation No.24546.

5. Sold by Sushila vide sale deed Vasika No.3711 dated 27.07.2012 to Krishna wife of Mohar Singh resident of Sangwari, Rewari, 3 Marlas, `8,00,000/-, Mutation No.25470.

6. Sold by Nirmala Devi vide sale deed Vasika No.3878 dated 02.08.2012 to Krishna wife of Mohar Singh, resident of Sangwari Rewari, 1 1⁄2 marlas, `4,00,000/-, Mutation No.25454."

The application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC was moved on 25.04.2005. There was a refusal of receipt of the summons and the Court, therefore, ordered for effecting the munadi service. Munadi service was effected but despite that, defendants did not appear and the trial Court had rightly passed the ex parte decree. The application was also barred by limitation which has not been explained properly. All these facts are not noticed by the lower Appellate Court while accepting the appeal filed by the defendants and therefore, seek for setting aside of the impugned order. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and appraised the paper book. In the first instance, the petitioners-plaintiffs gave the address of the defendants as resident of Rewari, Tehsil and District Rewari. Later on, on receipt of the report of the summons, there was address given as Sainipura, behind Saraswati Vihar, Rewari. No house number was given and the process server submitted a report that there was a refusal. The trial

-3Court, therefore, ordered munadi service and munadi summons were issued for effecting service at the address Konsiwas Road, Rewari, which was/is not the address given by the plaintiffs. There is an apparent collusion between the plaintiffs and the process serving agency, much less, an attempt to avoid the appearance of the defendants for obtaining the ex parte judgment and decree. Such an action of the plaintiffs, in my view, is not required to be accepted and the lower Appellate Court has rightly set aside the ex parte judgment and decree passed by the trial Court. I do not find any illegality and perversity in the order passed by the lower Appellate Court, much less, the order cannot be said to be passed without jurisdiction. No ground for interference is made. The revision petition is dismissed.

(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE July 28, 2016 Pankaj* Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No