G.R. Majithia, J. - (1.) The defendant-petitioners have challenged the order of the learned Subordinate Judge whereby he refused to recall his order dated October 15, 1988. Resultant effect is that th averment made in the plaint has to be taken as correct as the suit can be decreed in terms of Order 8 Rule 5(2) of the Civil Procedure Code. However, in the instant case, the learned Subordinate Judge has directed the plaintiffs to establish their case by leading evidence. It will be useful to refer to the interim orders passed in the State.
(2.) On August 18, 1988, the following order was passed:- "At the request of proxy counsel, for filing written statement the case is adjourned to 17th September, 1988."
(3.) On September 17, 1988, the following order was passed:- "Defendant No. 4 who was served through publication in the Tribune dated 6th June, 1988 was not present on the last date of hearing. Therefore, he was proceeded against ex parte. Written statement by defendants No. 1 to 3 is not filed. Last opportunity is granted to file the same subject to payment of Rs. 100/- as costs for Ist October, 1988.";