- (1.) Heard Shri R.B.S. Rathaur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Sharad Pathak, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos.2 & 3.
(2.) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeks to challenge the order dated 25.09.2013, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Pratapgarh, whereby the order dated 08.05.2009, passed by the learned trial court rejecting the application moved by respondents no.2 and 3 for setting aside ex -parte decree under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC, has been reversed. Father of the petitioner late Kunwar Tej Pratap Singh instituted a suit for declaration and possession which was registered as Regular Suit No.6/1977. The defendants in the suit filed their written statements and accordingly issues were also framed by the learned trial court on 06.12.1978. However, it appears that after putting in appearance before the learned trial court and filing written statements, the defendants could not appear before the court which resulted in the suit being ex -parte decreed on 05.07.2004.
(3.) On 18.10.2004 the respondent no.19 -Ladies Clup, Pratapgarh, moved an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC for setting the judgment and decree dated 05.07.2004, which was registered as Misc. Case No.192 of 2004. Husband of respondent no.2 and father of respondent no.3 -late Raja Arun Pratap Singh also moved similar application seeking setting aside of the judgment and decree dated 05.07.2004 under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC. The said application was registered as Misc. Case No.76/2006. Both the Misc. Cases were clubbed together and by a common order dated 08.05.2009 the applications were rejected. Against the judgment and degree dated 05.07.2004, the respondent no.19 had also preferred First Appeal From Order, namely, F.A.F.O. No.996/2009 before this Court which was dismissed on 16.11.2009 for non -prosecution under Chapter XII Rule 4 of the High Court Rules. The Ladies Club, Pratapgarh i.e. respondent no. 19 in this petition, thus, did not file any appeal against the order dated 08.05.2009 rejecting the application moved under Order 9 Rule 13 of the C.P.C. Respondent nos.2 and 3 preferred Misc. Appeal against the order dated 08.05.2009, passed by the learned trial court, which has been allowed by the learned Additional District Judge by means of the order dated 25.09.2013, which is under challenge in this petition.;