Tapan Kumar Dutt, J.

1. This Court has heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties. The facts of the case, briefly, are as follows:

The plaintiff/appellant filed a suit against the defendants/respondents being Title Suit No. 474 of 1987 which was placed before the learned 9th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta.

2. The plaintiff/appellant prayed for a decree for declaration that the ex parte decree passed on 9.3.1986 in Ejectment Suit No. 1003 of 1985 was obtained by fraud by the defendant No. 1/respondent and the said ex parte decree should be declared as null and void.

3. The suit was contested by the defendant No. 1/respondent by filing a written statement denying the material allegations made in the plaint. It appears that the suit was filed on 13th March, 1987.

4. It is the plaintiffs case that on 25th April, 1987 the plaintiff was dispossessed from the property which was the subject-matter of the said Ejectment Suit No. 1003 of 1985 and, accordingly, on 26th April, 1996, the plaintiff filed an application for amendment of the plaint praying decree for recovery of possession in respect of the property which was the subject matter of the said Ejectment Suit No. 10