B.M.Mitra, J. - (1.)The present revisional application is directed against a part of Order No. 2 dated 25th January, 1995 passed by the learned Munsif, 4th Court, Sealdah in Title Suit No. 25 of 1995. The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner undertakes before this Court that he will file the certified copy of the impugned order as soon as it is obtained and the said undertaking is hereby recorded.
(2.)The present revisional application is taken up for hearing on contest.
(3.)By the impugned order an ex parte order of local inspection was passed under Order 39 rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 1976 Amendment of the Code of Civil Procedure has brought about a sea-change about the rigour of ex parte orders under Order 39 Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure which was not previously there under the unamended provision of Order 39 Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Order 39 Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure was there in the original body of the Code before amendment in cryptic form. But after amendment Clause (3) was superadded to Order 39 rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure which provides that notice is the normal rule save and except in exceptional situation where it appears that the object of making such order would be defeated by the delay. The said expression is almost couched in similar language to that of Order 39 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure where also notice is the usual rule and ex parte order is capable of being passed only when the object of the same would be defeated by the delay.
;