ORDER :

P.B.BALAJI, J.

The revision throws up an interesting question as to whether non-conformity to Order XX Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908, can be available to an aggrieved defendant, as judgement debtor, to canvas in an application under Section 47 the Code of Civil Procedure,1908.

2.I have heard Mr.R.Ravindran, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Mr.P.K. Sabapathi, learned counsel for the respondents.

3.Mr.R.Ravindran, learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that the revision petitioner suffered a judgement and decree in O.S.No.3505 of 1997 on 13.09.2005 and though an attempt was made to set aside the ex-parte decree, the petitioner was unsuccessful. He would however, submit that the mandate of Order XX Rule 4(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908, requires the judgement of the trial Court to contain a concise statement of the case, points for determination, decisions thereon and finally the reasons for such decision. Pointing out to the judgement passed by the trial Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the same clearly offends the definition of a “j