- (1.) The epitome of the facts, relevant for disposal of the present revision petition and emanating from the record is, that Gian Singh son of Tara Singhrespondent- plaintiff(for brevity "the plaintiff") filed the civil suit against Bahadur Singh and Company through its partner Bahadur Singh-petitioner-defendants(for short "the defendants"). Since, nobody appeared on behalf of the defendants, despite service by way of Munadi and affixation, so, ex-parte proceedings were ordered against them, by virtue of order dated 30.10.2003. They did not join the proceedings, ultimately, the suit was decreed against them by the trial Court, by means of ex-parte judgment and decree dated 30.11.2004.
(2.) As, the defendants did not comply with the aforesaid decree, therefore, the plaintiff filed the execution petition. The defendants appeared and moved an application for setting aside the ex-parte judgment and decree dated 30.11.2004, invoking the provisions of Order 9 Rule 13 CPC, inter alia, pleading that neither they were duly served, nor had any knowledge about the pendency of the civil suit and the ex-parte decree was illegally passed against them.
(3.) The plaintiff refuted the prayer of the defendants and filed the reply, raising certain preliminary objections of, maintainability of the application, limitation and locus standi of the defendants. According to the plaintiff, the judgment and decree in question were passed after due service on the defendants. It will not be out of place to mention here that the plaintiff has stoutly denied all other allegations contained in the application and prayed for its dismissal.;