CR No. 5105 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No. 5105 of 2010 Date of decision:- 8.11.2010 Vikram Singh and another ......petitioners vs. Balbir and ors ......respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: - Mr. S.K.Yadav Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Sanjay Mittal, Advocate for respondents. HEMANT GUPTA, J (ORAL) Petitioners are the legal heirs of defendant No. 1. Plaintiff- respondents filed a suit for partition of the joint property. A preliminary decree was passed on 12.8.1994. In the application of preparation of final decree, defendant No. 1 Richhpal was proceeded ex-parte, subsequently he died. The said application which was dismissed in default, has been ordered to be restored vide order dated 10.6.2008. Subsequently, an application has been filed by legal heirs of the deceased Richhpal for setting aside the said order as the order is said to have been passed without issuing the notice to the petitioners. The said application has been dismissed on 30.7.2010. As per the arguments raised by learned counsel for respondent, predecessor in interest has been proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 11.12.2003. Therefore, the petitioners were not required to be served with notice of restoration of the application of the proceedings for preparation of CR No. 5105 of 2010 -2- the final decree. The said arguments of learned counsel for the respondents is meritorious. The petitioners were not required to be served with a notice of the application for restoration of the proceedings for preparation of the final decree as their predecessor in interest was proceeded ex-parte earlier on 11.12.2003 but in the interest of justice, I am of the opinion that the petitioners should be permitted to participate in proceedings for preparation of the final decree as their presence would help in adjudicating all the issues arising between the parties for preparation of the final decree. Consequently, I do not find any illegality or material irregularity in the orders passed by learned trial Court on 10.6.2008 and 30.7.2010. But keeping in view the proceedings before the learned trial Court, the petitioners are permitted to participate in the proceedings for preparation of the final decree. Since the preliminary decree was granted in the year 1994, learned trial Court is directed to expeditiously conclude the proceedings for preparation of the final decree preferably within a period of one year for the date fixed before the trial Court. Disposed of in the above terms. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE 8.11.2010 preeti