Civil Revision No.4602 of 2007 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.4602 of 2007 Date of decision : 12.1.2009 Subash Chand .....Petitioner Versus Smt. Bati and others ...Respondents **** CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Mr.Manoj Kumar Sood, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. I.K.Mehta, Senior Advocate with Mr. M.S.Kohli, Advocate for the respondents. S. D. ANAND, J. The plea filed by the petitioner under Order 9 Rule 7 C.P.C. was declined by the learned Trial Judge without frame of issues and affording an opportunity to parties to have their say in the context of sufficiency or otherwise of the ground for the requested setting aside of the exparte order dated 23.4.1999. In a plea of this category, the Trial Court is ordained to afford the parties an opportunity to adduce evidence in support of their respective pleas. It is, thereafter, only that a Court would be able to decide upon the sufficiency or otherwise of the ground on the basis whereof applicant/party applies for the setting aside of the exparte order. The adoption of the indicated course by the learned Trial Court was not in order. The petition shall stand allowed. The impugned order dated 23.4.1999 is quashed. The learned Trial Court is directed to dispose of the Civil Revision No.4602 of 2007 -2- **** application under Order 9 Rule 7 of the C.P.C. within fifteen days from the date on which the matter comes up before it. For that purpose, the parties (through their learned counsel) are directed to appear before the learned Trial Judge on 19.1.2009. The issues in the context shall be framed by the Trial Court on 19.1.2009 itself. Thereafter, the parties shall be afforded one adjournment each to adduce evidence in support of their respective contentions. If the summoning of an official witness is required, the party requesting for the purpose aforementioned, shall be entitled to dasti process. However, that party shall not be entitled to raise a plea for another adjournment just because it is not able to serve the official witness, for one reason or the other. The grant of this rider would allay the apprehension of the respondents that relevant civil suit pertaining to the year 1999 would further get delayed. Disposed of accordingly. January 12, 2009 (S. D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE Note: Whether to be referred to Reporter : Yes/No