Sabina, J. - (1.) PETITIONERS have filed this petition challenging the orders dated 22.07.2005 and 27.07.2013. Respondent No. 1 had filed the suit for declaration that he was Sant of Dera Hamam Singh, Ward No. 3, Zira on the basis of Majornama dated 22.11.1989. Notice was issued to the defendants. Defendant No. 1 Manohar Singh appeared and filed his written statement.
(2.) ON 01.02.1996, following order was passed by the trial court: - Sh. N.K. Aggarwal counsel for the defendant has made statement that he has no instructions for today to pursue the case on behalf of defendant. In view of this statement, the defendant is proceeded against ex -parte. Two PWs are present. Let they be examined. Cost not paid. Thereafter, plaintiff led his evidence in support of his case. Trial court decreed the suit of the plaintiff vide judgment/decree dated 25.05.1996. Defendant No. 1 -Manohar Singh moved an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short 'CPC') for setting aside the ex parte decree dated 25.05.1996. Trial court vide impugned order dated 22.07.2005 dismissed the application filed by defendant No. 1 -Manohar Singh. The said order was upheld by the Appellate Court vide impugned judgment dated 27.07.2013. Hence, the present petition by the legal heirs of Manohar Singh -defendant No. 1.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the trial court had erred in initiating ex parte proceedings against defendant No. 1 -Manohar Singh, as the counsel for Manohar Singh had pleaded no instructions. In fact, notice should have been issued to defendant No. 1. In support of argument, learned counsel has placed reliance on Malkiat Singh and another Vs. Joginder Singh and others, 988 (2) Civil Court Cases 83 (SC).;