IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR t CHHATTISGARH Civil Révision No. 3Q /2oo$iml3 Bane“ APPLICANT / PLAINTIFF : Smt. Pushpa Saraf W/ o. Prem Kumar Saraf aged about 50 years, R/o. 3-A, Sidheswari Road, Calcutta - 700029 (W.B. VERSUS . NN-APPLICANT a g F Suresh Kumar Jagatramka EFENDANT S / o. Banwarilal Jagatramka aged about 46 years, R/o. Gandhi Chowk, Raigarh,Tahsi1 85 District Raigarh (C.G.) 49600 1 APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 1 15 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 4 / ) O a\ L4 / {, 5.3. Hon’ble 5hr? Justice MK. Agarwal who-2009 § ShnVIpm Pumabl counselfo the applicant Shrl Ramkumar Tlwarl couns ”or non-applicant. Heard on admisswn .The Instant rewsmn Is fled passed by Clwl Judge, Class- N0‘44/96 whereby and whereunde the application fled by the non- appllcantidefendant under Order 9 ule 13 of C P C was allowed and the ex—parte decree passed In Cwl Suit No 40-N1991 Vlde wdgment and decree dated 28-04-1992 has b en set aside Shn Vlpm Punjabi, learned co nsel for the applicant eubmits that the learned Trial Court has wrongiyf recorded a finding that summons were not served upon the non-ag‘plicant and, therefore, the order passed by the learned Trial Court su I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the order impugned The learned Trial Court has recorded a categoricai finding. that as per the applicant/plaintiff’s version that summons were served on the nod-applicant on 20-05-1991 is factually incorrect. As per order sheet dated 19-04-1991. case was fixed for hearing on 20-064 991, on that date, the trial Court has ordered for issuance of notice on payment process fee by the plaintiff. in view of the above, in the considered opinion of this Court, the Trial Court has not committed any jurisdictional illegality in passing the amst the order dated 29-10-2603 Ralgarh In Misceilaneous Case fiers from jurisdictional illegality i, ~. "14W "’;V"“" « “qr $Kvamah t ,— r tee-were i mmiwism) L l ... r i ‘am;r&$'liw'rci7 Whar‘i’a’iai i I » mwmm WWI‘IwW *Wwém ._'Lr’ mpugned order. It is trite law that sjetting aside the ex—parte decree, ajpproach. ln view of the above, l do not and therefore, being devoid of substance is liable to be and is hereby However, the matter is per‘ding since long, therefore, it is directed that the trial Court shall d preferably withing period of six mon hs from the date of receipt of copy if this order. Consequently, M.(C).P. No.25 12004 also stands dismissed. Sd/- - ** * . Jc . Q.Q\ NO‘ “mm mm (Wa) mwWm iagfw mm E $$§Ha§$ ile dealing with the application for t dismissed. V - a trial Court shouid be liberal in its find any substance in this revision ide the suit es early as possible .‘u’m L'ee‘" N.K. Agrawal‘ Judge o i