JUDGMENT

This Original Petition (DRT) has been filed challenging Ext.P7 order in I.A.No.1941/2017 in T.A.No.159/2016. The petitioners are the defendants in T.A.No.159/2016 on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Ernakulam arising out of O.A.No.174/2012.

2. According to the petitioners, in O.A.No.174/2012, they were not served with any notice and they were set ex parte and a final order was issued on 4.10.2012. According to the petitioners, they came to know of the ex parte order in O.A.No.174/2012 only when a copy of the order was received by them. They filed I.A.No.3410/2012 seeking to set aside the ex parte order. A reading of the averments in the affidavit in support of I.A.No.3410/2012 would indicate that summons in O.A.No.174/2012 was issued at the residential address of the Managing Partner and the summons was returned 'unclaimed'. It is stated in the affidavit that, though intimation was given, the Managing Partner of the petitioners was 'absent' and hence the summons was not served and it was returned 'unserved'. According to the affidavit, if the summons to the firm had been issued in the address of the firm, the same would have been received.

3. The Bank filed objecti