- (1.) The suit for specific performance decreed on 30.04.2001 was sought to be set aside through defendant Nos. 4 to 8 on a plea that they had not been served. They were daughters and widow of deceased Jagga Singh. The defendant Nos. 1 to 3 who were the sons had been served and they had contested unsuccessfully the claim for specific performance.
(2.) The application for setting aside the decree was brought on a plea that they had been living away in their respective husband's houses and the 8th defendant-mother was living along with one of them. The Court found that the mother had actually been served in suit and her plea that she had not been served was not correct. As regards the other defendants namely, D4 to D7, the Court held that if they must have known about the decree in May 2007 when they had seen the fard jamabandi entries and consequently the petition filed 66 days after the said date was barred by limitation.
(3.) The Appellate Court set aside the order and allowed for the decree to be set aside as regards the applicant's holding that D4 to D7 had not been admittedly served and consequently their own statement of when they came to know must give a justification for allowing for a contest on merits. It is against this order that this revision has been filed by the plaintiff-decree holder.;