KHUKI BARMANI Vs. KUMAR PRAKRITISH CHANDRA BARUA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision is directed against an order of the learned Assistant District Judge, Dhubri refusing to revive a suit which was earlier decreed in absence of the defendant.

(2.) THE ground on which the revival application was filed under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure was that no summons was served on the defendant. The learned Assistant District Judge came to the finding that in fact, no summons was served on the defendant. He, however, found during the course of the examination of the defendant, who is an illiterate woman, that she admitted that she did not file the application for revival and also that she did not put her signature on the application. The learned judge has accepted the possibility regarding the first answer that it may be that she personally had not filed the revival application and therefore he would not like to take any serious notice of this answer. With regard to the second answer that she did not put the signature, he thought that this was a case where the Court's process was going to be abused by someone pretending to be acting on behalf of the petitioner.