IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 32 of 2008 Date of Decision: May 21, 2009 Gainda Ram and others …Petitioners Versus Bishember Dayal. … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND Present: Mr. P.R. Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioners. None for the respondent. **** S.D. Anand, J. None has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent to assist this Court. The grievance of the defendants – petitioners is that they have been indicted on the basis of the ex-parte evidence, without any service of the proceedings having been effected upon them. It is apparent from the impugned order itself that the ex-parte proceedings were ordered against them by the learned Trial Court only on the basis of a report of refusal. C.R. No. 32 of 2008 The impugned order does not notice whether the report of refusal was attested by any witness or not. It was essential for the learned Trial Court to satisfy itself that the pendency of the proceedings was properly notified to the alleged contemnors (the petitioners before this Court). In the circumstances of the case, the petition shall stand allowed. The impugned order shall stand set aside. The defendants – petitioners would be entitled to join the proceedings and file the pleadings. Thereafter, the learned Court shall proceed to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with law. May 21, 2009 ( S.D. Anand ) vkd Judge 2