Back
1927 Supreme(Lah) 169
Lahore High Court
Zafar Ali, J.
Mahesha Mal - Dayal Das - Appellant
Versus
Muhammad Jamil - Respondent
Decided On : 18-11-1927
JUDGMENT
Zafar Ali, J. - The facts that need be stated in connexion with this application in revision are briefly as below:
2. The plaintiff-petitioner having obtained an ex-parte decree the defendant applied to have the decree set aside but he did not deposit with the application the amount due from him under the decree, nor gave security for the performance of the decree as he was bound to do under Section 17, Small Cause Courts Act, the suit having been decided by a Judge of the Court of Small Causes. The Judge, however, did not notice this omission and issued a notice to the plaintiff. A copy of the notice was affixed on his door on 11th March 1926, when he was absent from home but his wife was at home. He did not turn up and eventually the application was accepted and the ex-parte decree was set aside and at the same time the suit was dismissed because the plaintiff had not appeared. It is clear that the order dismissing the suit was ultra vires as the date on which it was dismissed was not the date fixed for hearing it. Secondly, the proceedings on the application for setting aside the ex-parte decree were also ultra vires because the defendant-applicant had not complied with the provisions of Section 17, Small Cause Courts Act.
3. I, therefore, accept this application for revision and set aside both the orders and restore the original order granting the plaintiff an ex-parte decree. No order as to costs in this Court.
