- (1.) This second appeal is directed against the order of the learned Additional District Judge, Rohtak, dated February 18, 1971, whereby the judgment and decree of the trial Court was set aside and the case was remanded for a fresh trial from the state when the ex parte order was passed.
(2.) The appellants filed a suit against the respondents for the realisation of Rs. 4,000/- as principal, Rs. 1,440/- as interest and Rs. 20/- as expenses of the notice. Respondent 2 was served personally and he put in appearance on behalf of himself and respondent 4. Respondents 3 and 5 could not be served through ordinary process. Consequently, they were ordered to be served through publication for July 4, 1966. The said respondents (Nos. 3 and 5) did not attend the Court on July 4, 1966, but as learned Subordinate Judge did not hold the court on that day (July 4, 1996), the case was set down for hearing for the next day. On July 5, 1966 respondents 3 and 5 were again not present and the learned Subordinate Judge ordered that ex parte proceedings be taken against them. After recording evidence of the parties the trial Court decreed the suit against the respondents which was set aside on appeal, as stated above.
(3.) Mr. M.S. Jain, the learned counsel for the appellants, has relied on Rule 4 of Chapter 1-K of Volume I of the High court Rules and Orders and contended that in the event of a Presiding Officer of a Court being absent, all the cases fixed for the day in question shall be deemed to have been adjourned to the next working day when the Presiding Officer is present and it was the duty of the parties to attend the Court on that date. The said rule relied upon by the learned counsel reads as under :- "On the occurrence of an unanticipated holiday or in the event of the Presiding Officer of a Court being absent owing to sudden illness or other unexpected cause, all cases fixed for the day in question shall be deemed to have been automatically adjourned to the next working day when the Presiding Officer is present and it shall be the duty of the parties or their counsel (but not of witnesses) to attend Court on that day. Whenever possible the Presiding Officer, should as soon as may be, fix fresh dates in cases fixed for the date which is declared a holiday or for which he has obtained leave, and issue notices to the parties, their counsel and witnesses, of the fresh dates fixed.";