IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 318 of 2010 Date of decision: 14.09.2010 Munish Kumar & another …Petitioners. Versus Hoshiaru Singh & others …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner: Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, Advocate. For the respondent : None. Deepak Gupta, J. (Oral) 1. This petition is directed against the order dated 3rd August, 2010, whereby the application filed by defendant No. 3 for setting aside ex-parte order dated 15.09.2009 has been allowed and the defendant No. 3 has been permitted to join and contest the proceedings. 2. The undisputed facts are that defendant No. 3 was proceeded against ex-parte on 15.9.2009. An application for setting aside the ex-parte proceedings was filed on 12.5.2010. In the application, it was prayed that the process server had never visited the house of defendant No. 3 and the defendant 1 Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. 2 was not having knowledge of the proceedings. This application was contested and the learned trial Court vide the impugned order has allowed this application subject to payment of costs of Rs. 1,000/-. 3. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that the defendant has been very casual in the matter and the application itself does not set out the grounds for re-calling the ex-parte order. It has further been contended that admittedly, the application for setting aside the ex-parte proceedings was filed after a lapse of eight months and there is no application for condoning the delay. 4. No doubt, there is delay in filing the application inasmuch as it does not appear that the application has been filed on the next date. However, it is apparent from the record that between the period 15.9.2009 till the date the application for setting aside ex-parte order was filed, no effective proceedings had taken place in this suit. A defendant has a right to join the proceedings at any stage. If he does not move an application for setting aside ex-parte proceedings, he rejoins the proceedings at that stage and cannot recall any orders or proceedings which may have taken place during the interregnum. However, in case nothing material has taken place during the interregnum, he has a right to rejoin the proceedings and in case, his written statement was on record 3 and no evidence has been recorded, no prejudice is going to be caused to the plaintiff, if the defendant is permitted to rejoin the proceedings. 5. Therefore, I find no merit in the petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. (Deepak Gupta) Judge September 14, 2010 (rajni)