The court has inherent powers to set aside an ex parte decree even at the instance of a party who has been impleaded after the passing of the decree, if the interests of justice so require.

( 1 ) ONE Chunduru Venkatareddi, a philanthropic Vysya gentleman executed a trust deed in respect of a major portion of his very substantial properties in 1944 called "sri Chunudri Venkatareddi Charities, Vijayawada" with the object of promoting industrial and technological progress in the country, evidenced by a declaration of trust dated 24-4-1944. He was to be the founder-trustee during his lifetime. The plaintiff who claims to be the Abhimana Putrika of the said Sri Chunduru Venkatareddi, (hereinafter referred to as the first defendant) and also claims to have been adopted by him later, filed the suit O. S. No. 124 of 1969 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Guntur for a declaration that the Trust deed dated 24-4-1944 is a sham and nominal transaction and not binding on the plaintiff in so far as it relates to the interest of the plaintiff in the properties, and for specific performance of the suit agreement and for possession of the plaintiffs half share with a direction to the first defendant to effect division of the said properties into two equal shares by metes and bounds and in case the first defendant fails to do so, it was prayed that the court itself shall effect the said division. The plaintiff based her claim on an agreement dated 27-12-1943 whereunder the first defendant is said to have agreed to give her the A Schedule properties which, it was alleged, the first defendant subsequently placed in the trust. The said properties were to be given to the plaintiff on her attaining the age of 25 years and since she has attained the age of 25 years, she alleged, she is entitled to the specific performance of the said agreement and also for a declaration that the trust deed is sham and nominal. The other trustees were impleaded as defendants 2, 3 and 4 to the suit. The suit was pending for sometime and it was posed for trial to 27-1-1971. On that day, the defendants were not ready and hence, the suit was adjourned to the next day i. e. 28-1-1971. On this day also, the defendants were not ready and hence three witnesses were examined on behalf of the plaintiff including herself and the suit was decreed ex parte. I. A. No. 433 of 1971 was then filed by the second defendant in the suit (one of the trustees) for setting aside the ex parte decree on several grounds with which we shall deal hereinafter. Thereafter I, As. 939 and 940 of 1971 were filed by one Sri R. Ganganna Pantulu, who had been appointed as the executive officer in respect of the said charities under the 1966 Act, to implead himself as a party defendant as well as to set aside the said ex parte decree. The said three I. As. were taken up together by the learned Subordinate Judge and after receiving the oral and documentary evidence on behalf of the parties in the said I. As. , all the three petitions were dismissed under the impugned judgment and order dated 1 9/10/1973. C. M. A. No. 379 of 1973 is filed by the second defendant while C. R. P. Nos. 127 and 128 of 1974 are filed by the executive officer.

( 2 ) I. A. No. 433 of 1971 was filed by the Second defendant on the ground that he could not be present on 28-1-1971 inasmuch as he was not informed by his advocate about the said date of hearing. He alleged that the suit is a collusive one and that the Court has no jurisdiction and also that the Endorsements Department is a necessary and proper party to the suit. A counter has been filed by the plaintiff-respondent alleging that the petitioner had tendered his resignation which was accepted by the Board of Trustees even in September 1970 and that in any event, the Board of trustees itself had resolved on 24-1-1971 not to contest the said suit. It was further submitted that the second defendant-petitioner was personally present in the court on 28-1-1971 and that he took some money also from the plaintiff for looking into paying further amounts and having not succeeded in extracting more money, he has come forward with the said false