Civil Revision No. 3572 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 3572 of 2011 Date of Decision: 27.5.2011 *** Abdul .. Petitioner Vs. Ilyas & Ors. .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present:- Mr. Sudhir Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. A civil suit for declaration challenging the sale-deed dated 1.9.1994 executed by petitioner Abdul in favour of Sahab Khan and for permanent injunction was filed by respondents No.1 to 3, in the year 1995, against the present petitioner and respondent No.4 for restraining them from alienating the suit land to anybody else. The petitioner was proceeded against ex-parte on 25.1.1996 and the suit was decided on 26.5.2001. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application for setting aside the ex-parte order as well as judgment. By dint of judgment dated 10.4.2009 the said application was dismissed. The appeal preferred by the petitioner was also dismissed by the appellate Court below by virtue of judgment dated 27.4.2011, leading to the institution of present civil revision. Heard. It is evident from the record that in support of his plea that he was never served in the main suit, the petitioner did not even bother of step into the witness box, rather his attorney appeared for giving the evidence. Both the Courts below concurrently held that initially the summons were sent to the petitioner, which received back with the report of his refusal. At that juncture, instead of proceeding against him ex-parte, the trial Court ordered for issuance of Munadi, not only once but thrice. Despite that the petitioner did not dare to appear before the Court. The evidence produced Civil Revision No. 3572 of 2011 2 by the respondents also belied the alleged plea taken by the petitioner and both the Courts below, on the strength of the same, concurrently held that the petitioner was having due notice of the suit, but he deliberately did not appear to contest the same. The findings of fact returned by both the Courts below need no interference by this Court. Dismissed. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE May 27, 2011 Jiten