IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. O.O.C.J. O.O.C.J. NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE OF MOTION No.1753 of 2006 OF MOTION No.1753 of 2006 OF MOTION No.1753 of 2006. IN IN IN SUIT SUIT SUIT No.717 of 2005. No.717 of 2005. No.717 of 2005. Morarji Hariram .... Plaintiff. Versus. Neera Handa & Ors. .... Defendants. Ms. Snehal Shah with Mr. Yogesh Thakur i/b L. J. Law, Advocate for the plaintiff. Mr. Prashant G. Karande, Advocate for Defendant nos. 1 to 3. CORAM CORAM CORAM :SMT. NISHITA MHATRE J. :SMT. NISHITA MHATRE J. :SMT. NISHITA MHATRE J. DATE DATE DATE :07/06/2006 :07/06/2006 :07/06/2006. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. This Notice of Motion has been taken out to set aside ex-parte decree passed in the suit by an order dated 24th March, 2006. This Court has decreed the summary suit against the plaintiff. The plaintiff, it appears, sought execution of the decree. The defendants have filed the present Motion to set aside the said ex-parte decree. In my view, since it is an order passed under Order VIII Rule 5 and not under Order IX Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Code, the Motion for setting aside such an ex-parte decree is not maintainable. The defendants will have to file an appeal against such a decree as is well settled by the judgment reported in 1999 (1) Bom. CR 97 1999 (1) Bom. CR 97 1999 (1) Bom. CR 97 (Dhanwantrai (Dhanwantrai (Dhanwantrai R. Yogi & Ors. Vs. Satish J. Dave R. Yogi & Ors. Vs. Satish J. Dave R. Yogi & Ors. Vs. Satish J. Dave & Ors). Ors). Ors). 2] Notice of Motion is dismissed accordingly. At this stage, the plaintiff states that he will not execute the decree for a period of two weeks from today. (SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA MHATRE,J.) MHATRE,J.) MHATRE,J.)