@' 1 ‘ $§3§§§§ gméE” '‘HE OWELEVKHIGH COURT OE_,cmaATTISGARH Aw BILAsPUR c.G.‘ H lNuI H ‘ Misc. Civil Appeal.'[‘{%%)/ %f APP§LLANT t. = / 0m S/g) Prakash Farchamal Tanwani Tanwani ageé R/g 58 Mahasati years Waré Bhatapara; Tah. Bhatapara; Distt. Raipur c.G. V$rsu§ .‘ RE OMDENT, 1 3 wt, Jamuna Devi-Jetwani W/a Late Shri F’ Khanchanea J®twani R/® Maha Sati Ward. Bhatapara Tah Bhatapara Distt &&ip‘1r "évvcvic— rg_ (:A h W‘%3J‘mz ‘f‘LJYf.€1’4 [b/[;5I’Lul/ gag/km 61:4 , V”) ‘ Misc. Civil Appeal Under ®r§er 43 R.I. fk ‘ / (a) @f Civil Pracedure cede against 1) Oraer Dt. 1%.05 2) Case Nan- M.c1v11 ‘guit é’27o4. .. 3) Passea by—“éecana add1.Di$trict Ju<ige; Baleda bazar C.G. 4) Parties- 0m Prakash Tanwani. vs. Smt. Jamuna Devi. $ Anngturg—A—l ’ ’Where in appliaatian for setting article exparty éecree u/o I,R. 13 CFC has been rejeateé. ‘ Details 0f Griginal civil suit. 1) Civil suit Ne. lffé/oz 2) Parties- Smt. Jamuna Devi. v . emprakash Tanwami. u/r‘ In Ceurt - 2m Mdl.District Judge.’ Baméa Bazarg C.G. _ 1} \4) Date of Juagement— £74103 andnéecree. where in the suit has been decreeé exyarty annexu tire A—Z. Being aggrieved by ®r&er impugned (.Annexure A—i) the appeillant begs w prefer this misc. civil appéal o n fenllawigg‘ agai§n st @ther greunés: — t O 2 § ‘ i ‘ p i ainw ”kW/W .. mzoof ‘ mam (W) mmmsné‘a I mméwm a; a m 818.7 HorFbLe ShrE Jastice MK. Assamtal iM 2-Q2-2010 $hri Upendra Bharat, ckounsei for the appellant. Shri Sunil OtwanL counse for the respondent No.1. Heard. l Fee3ing aggrieved by the ‘arder dated 16-09-2005 passed by Secend Additional District Ju‘ge. Baioda Sazar in Misc. CM: Suit wow/2004‘ whereby a whereunder the appiication pyeferred by the appeHant unde Drder 9 Ruie 13 of ORG. for Séfting aside the ex~parte decr e dated 02-04-2003 has been dismissed, the mstant appea! ha been filed by detendant No.1 Om Prakaeh Tanwani. Facts briefty stated are as nder: The appeltantfdefendant ster ' Their one sister Smt Bhagwantin Bai has died The piamtiff/a'espandent instituted a Chm Suit beating No 12—M20 2 in the Court of Second Additionai Dietrict Judge, Bai oa Bazar ctaiming reizef of dectaration and titie, partition an possession ovea' the suit iand a§ainst the appeiiant. The said uit was proceeded ex—parte on 1840—2002 and thereafter, ex—pa e decree has been passed on 02-04-2603. The appeiiant herein has fiied an appiication for setting 'i aside the ex—parte decree inter aiia on the ground that the piaintiff has executed an agre ment dated 30—09-2002 and ." .1 and the reepondent i.e. piaintiff are teat brother and n 0 i MyA; Nax / m §Hi$ “a 20 Q\§’_ i anéel new (We) mmmma # }’ mm#w®w $Wm ‘ccmpromised the matter aw agreed t9 withdmw the said suét. Based 0n the above agreement, the appeiiant cm net appear m Ehe case. This fact was notb ght to the netice of triaé Court and in pursuance thereof, trial C urk proceeded ex-parte againet t e appellant emf passed the ex parte decree whfch deserves to be set aside. is. - During the course of er ument in the §nsiant appeal learned counsel for plamtrflfres, ndem No has admlttecl ihe a compromise the grounds state In the appllcation under Order S Rule 13 [of C.P.C. filed by the appellants are earrect and he has no objection it the appeal allowed and ex—parte eecree passed by the trlal Court is set as de 1 bonstdermg the facts of t e ease and the statement 0f learned oeunsel for the respond ms m the consldered optntorl of this Court the appeal deserve to be al'owed and It is hereby Ilowed and consequent y, the de ree dated 02 04 2003 passed m CM: Suit No t2 A120G2 ls here y set asrde The matter ts remit‘ed bac to the tnal Cour? :or decrdmg are surt on rts own merrts m acco danee wxth law lt is expected that the trral Court shall decrde the surt exoeoltlously ilLr Sd/- N.K. Agawal Jade r u l e a : ,