Honble YAMIN, J.–This is a revision against the order of learned Additional District Judge No.3, Jodhpur dated 30.3.96 by which he dismissed Civil Misc. Appeal No.18/96.

(2). I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties.

(3). Brief facts are that plaintiff respondent filed a civil suit No.257/91 against UIT. The suit proceeded exparte because after service of notice nobody appeared on behalf of UIT. The exparte decree was passed. Then the counsel for the UIT informed the UIT on 7.3.95 that an exparte decree was passed. Then the UIT submitted an application before the learned Additional Civil Judge alongwith an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to set aside the exparte decree. The application under Order 9 Rule 12 CPC was dismissed on 8.12.95. Appeal was filed before the learned District Judge which was decided by Additional District Judge on 30.3.96 and the same was dismissed.

(4). Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a scheme was prepared by the UIT and that in case the exparte decree remains in force, serious prejudice will be causes to the petitioner. It has been submitted that both the courts below have acted illegally and with material irregu

Click Here to Read the rest of this document