JUDGEMENT
M.Y.Eqbal -
(1.) This appeal by the defendant
Nos. 1 to 3 is directed against the judgment
and order dated 25-4-1996 passed by
Sub udge II Lohardaga in Miscellaneous Case
No. 8/95 whereby he has rejected the petition
filed bythe appellant under Order IX, Rule
13, CPC and refused to set aside the ex parte
decree passed in title suit No. 15/92.
(2.) The plaintiffs-respondents No. 1 and
2 filed the aforementioned suit against the
appellants and defendant-respondent No. 3 for
a decree of specific performance of contract.
The said suit was decreed on context against
responent No. 3 and ex parte against the appellants.
(3.) The appellants thereafter filed an application
under Order IX, Rule 13, CPC for
setting aside the decree which was registered
as Miscellaneous Case No. 8/95. The case of
the petitioners-appellants was that no summon
or notice of the suit was ever served on them
and they have no notice or knowledge about
the ex parte decree. It was contended on behalf
of the said defendant-petitioners that appellant
Nos. 1 and 2 are the residents of Raipur,
Madhya Pradesh and no summons were served
on them.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.