IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 4242 of 2011 Date of Decision: 15.7.2011. Jai Parkash --Petitioner Versus Mahender Singh and others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. S.S. Godara, Advocate for the petitioner. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 13.5.2011 passed by the Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Ratia objecting the application of the petitioner, who is defendant no.2 in the suit for setting aside the ex-parte proceedings. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order. From the impugned order it appears that the petitioner was proceeded ex-parte on 27.3.2009, prior to that summons were sought to be served upon him and he refused the service of summons for which the Process Server reported the matter to the Court. Even thereafter, the Trial Court issued munadi. The petitioner-defendant failed to appear. It was only after the entire evidence of the parties had been recorded except the rebuttal evidence when the petitioner made an application for setting aside the ex- parte proceedings. A copy of the application dated 8.4.2011 has been placed on record. The petitioner has not disclosed as to when he came to know about the pendency of suit and ex-parte proceedings against him. There are vague averments in para 3 that the petitioner acquired the C.R. No. 4242 of 2011 -2- information regarding the pendency of the suit from defendant no.6 Tek Chand without disclosing any date and place. The Trial Court has also noticed that the petitioner's real brother is a party and contesting the suit and thus the Trial Court formulated an opinion that the petitioner had the knowledge of pendency of suit particularly in view of endorsement of refusal of summons by the process serving agency. I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is also not permitted to participate in the further proceedings. It is made clear that even when the petitioner is set ex-parte, he has the right to participate in further proceedings without the right to file pleadings or lead evidence. He can, however, cross-examine the witnesses of the other side and even argue the matter. With these observations, this petition is disposed of. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 15.7.2011. lucky