IMMANENI PANDURANGA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THE sole defendant in O. S. No. 1943/81 on the file of the Court of the principal Munsif Magistrate, Guntur is the petitioner herein. An exparte decree was passed on 24-6-82. There upon he filed I. A. No. 4951 /86 for setting aside the exparte decree passed against him. The learned Munsif Magistrate allowed that la. Challenging that decision of the learned Munsif Magistrate, the plaintiff preferred C. M. A. No. 22/88 in District Court, Guntur. The learned II Additional district Judge Guntur by order dt. 30-12-88 has allowed the said C. M. A. Aggrieved by the said decision the defendant preferred this revision.

( 2 ) THE short point urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the appeal preferred by the respondent herein (plaintiff) itself is incompetent. In support of his contention, he relied upon Order 43, Rule 1 sub-clause (d) of CPC which provides for an appeal only against an order passed under Order 9, Rule 13 CPC rejecting an application for an order to set aside a decree passed exparte. In the light of that specific provision providing for an appeal against an order passed under Order 9, Rule 13 CPC rejecting an application and t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document