Food Corporation Of India v. M/S Mahadev Traders & ORS

Civil Revision No. 5199 of 2014 -1- In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 5199 of 2014 Date of Decision: 21.4.2015.

Food Corporation of India .......Petitioner

Versus

M/s Mahadev Traders, Kurukshetra and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

Present:

Mr. Atul Gaur, Advocate for Mr. Sumeet Goel, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Kamal Gupta, Advocate for the respondents.

**** SABINA, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 5.4.2014 (Annexure P-9) whereby ex parte judgment/decree passed against the respondents, was set aside by the Appellate Court. Petitioner-corporation had filed suit for recovery against the respondents. The said suit was decreed in ex parte vide judgment/decree dated 5.8.2000. Respondents moved an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC' for short) for setting aside the ex parte judgment/decree dated 5.8.2000. The said application was dismissed by the Trial Court vide order dated 22.2.2012. However, in appeal, the Appellate Court allowed the application filed by the respondents under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC vide the impugned order GURPREET SINGH 2015.04.27 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Civil Revision No. 5199 of 2014 -2dated 5.4.2014 (Annexure P-9). Hence, the present petition by the petitioner.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record available on the file carefully. In the present case, efforts were made to serve the respondents by the Trial Court. It is not a case where the respondents had refused to accept service. Rather, correct addresses of the respondents were not furnished by the corporation and they were ordered to be served through substituted service. The case of the respondent is that they had no knowledge of the pendency of the proceedings against them. However, on coming to know about the passing of the decree against them, respondents moved the application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC for setting aside the ex parte decree against them.

It has transpired during the course of arguments that respondents have already furnished indemnity bonds with one surety in the like amount qua the decreetal amount to show their bona fide and the property of the respondents already stands attached. Since the ex parte proceedings against the respondents have been set aside, the dispute between the parties will be disposed of on merits. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, no ground for interference by this Court is made out. Dismissed.

(SABINA) JUDGE April 21, 2015 Gurpreet GURPREET SINGH 2015.04.27 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh