JUDGMENT :

1. In this petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the petitioners, namely, Shri Takam Sorang & Smti Talita Sorang, have put to challenge the order dated 16.11.2018, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Yupia, in Interlocutory Application No. 77/2018. It is to be noted here that vide the impugned order, dated 16.11.2018, the learned Court below had dismissed the Interlocutory Application No. 77/2018, for condonation of delay in preferring the Interlocutory Application No. 76/2018, under Order 9 Rule 13 readwith151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside of the impugned ex parte judgment and decree dated 04.09.2017, passed in Money Suit No. 35/2016, and the impugned order dated 09.01.2018, passed in Execution Petition No. 01/2018.

2. The factual background leading to filing of the present petition is briefly stated as under:-

“The respondent, being the plaintiff, instituted a Money Suit, being Money Suit No. 35/2016, in the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Yupia, against the defendants, the petitioners herein, for realization of sum of Rs. 1,79,01,000/-(Rupees one crore seventy nine lakhs and one thousand) only along with interest thereon, till realization of the same. The said Money Suit No. 35/2016 was listed on 13.06.2016, and upon the same, notice was issued to the petitioners on 13.06.2016. Thereafter, on 13.08.2016, when the notice, which was sent by a registered post with acknowledgement, did not return even after elapsed of 1 (one) month, the learned Court below has drawn presumption under Order V Rule 9 Sub Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure and decided to proceed with the case exparte. Then, the learned Court below has heard the case ex parte on 10.08.2017, and delivered the judgment on 04.09.2017. Thereafter, the respondent instituted one case for execution, being Execution Petition No. 01/2018, on which the learned court below has passed an order for attachment of property of the petitioner on 09.01.2018, and thereafter, the property of the petitioners, was attached. Thereafter, the learned Court below, vide order dated 19.04.2018, has directed the petitioners to attend the Court on 08.05.2018. The petitioner came to know about the same on 27.04.2018. Thereafter, her lawyer took 26 days and she filed an interlocutory application, being Misc. Application No. 76/2018, for setting aside the ex-parte order and another petition, being Misc. Application No. 77/2018, on 28.05.2018, for condonation of delay of 266 days in filing the inter-locutory application No. 76/2018. It also appears that in the said Application, the respondent has submitted his reply on 18.09.2018 and the learned Court below, after hearing learned Advocates of both sides, has dismissed the application for condonation of delay vide order dated 16.11.2018.”

3. Being highly aggrieved by the impugned order dated 16.11.2018, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Yupia, in Interlocutory Application No. 77/2018, the petitioners have preferred this revision petition on the following grounds:-

(i) That, the learned Court below, while passing the impugned order dated 16.11.2018, has failed to exercise the jurisdiction conferred on it while dismissing the condonation application of the petitioner;

(ii) That, the learned Court below failed to appreciate that the summon was not duly served on the petitioners/defendants as provided under Order V Rule 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure;

(iii) That, the learned Court below has erred in appreciating the fact that the service of summon upon the petitioners/defendants was presumed to be duly served on the fact that the summon was received by one Shri Kapa Sorang, who is not a duly authorized agent of the petitioners/defendants, and did not make an endeavor to ascertain the fact that why the summon was not duly served on the petitioners/defendants;

(iv) That, the learned Court below has failed to apply its mind while appreciating the provision of Order V