C.R. No. 4722 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 4722 of 2009 Date of Decision: August 21, 2009 Jagdish Raj …..Petitioner Vs. Parkash Singh …..Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Ms. R.K. Manaise, Advocate for the petitioner. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) The Courts below have dismissed the application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC filed by the defendant- petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was not served and that he is a permanent resident of Village Chaura Kalan. He has established this fact by producing Tulsi Ram, a resident of the said village. C.R. No. 4722 of 2009 [2] The plea of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that when the suit was filed by the plaintiff- respondent for possession by specific performance of agreement dated April 9, 1990, the same was dismissed ex-parte on April 16, 1995. The plaintiff- respondent had filed an appeal before the District Judge. The said judgment and decree was set aside by the then Additional District Judge , Gurdaspur, vide judgment dated May 26, 1995 and the case was remanded to the trial Court with a direction that plaintiff should be given an opportunity to prove agreement after recording the additional evidence. The defendant- petitioner on August 28, 1998 had filed an SAO No. 29 of 1998 in the High Court against the judgment and decree of the Appellate Court dated October 26, 1995. The notice of the same had been issued to the plaintiff- respondent. The Courts below observed that the petitioner had himself given his address as Village Chechian Chhodian, as such his plea that since 1998 he had been residing in Village Chaura Kalan has not been accepted by the Courts below. The Courts below have given sufficient reasons in dismissing the application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC and have rightly disbelieved the contentions put-forth in the application. No ground is made out for interference. Dismissed. August 21, 2009 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE