IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
KAMLA AND ANOTHER – Appellant
Versus
BANWARI LAL THROUGH LRS – Respondent
##PAGE1##
1 of 7
::: Downloaded on - 31-01-2026 09:08:42 :::
##PAGE2##CR No.294 of 2026 2026:PHHC: 012937
ordered and the defendant was proceeded ex parte on 18.09.2007. A(cid:24)er
recording ex parte evidence, the suit was decreed vide judgment and decree
dated 19.09.2012.
3. Banwari Lal expired on 29.11.2012. The respondent, his
grandson, claimed succession to the suit property on the basis of a registered
Will dated 06.05.2012, which was subsequently mutated in his favour on
10.06.2013 vide Muta,on No.4349 (Annexure P-7).
4. Respondent moved an applica,on under Order IX Rule 13 CPC
on 04.03.2014 for se6ng aside exparte judgment and decree dated
19.09.2012 (Annexure P-3). According to the respondent, he first acquired
knowledge of the ex parte decree on 03.03.2014, when he obtained a copy of
the jamabandi from the revenue authori,es. He then immediately filed the
applica,on under Order IX Rule 13 CPC along with an applica,on under
Sec,on 5 of the Limita,on Act.
5. Pe,,oners contested the applica,on by contending that
defendant Banwari was duly served as per law; that applica,on under Order
IX Rule 13 CPC was hopelessly barred by limita,on; that the respondent had
construc,ve knowledge of the decree at least on 10.06.2013, when muta,on
of the Will was sanc,oned; and that the respondent was not a party to the
suit and was a stranger thereto and so, had no locus standi to move an
applica,on under Order IX Rule 13 CPC.
6. Vide order dated 21.04.2014, the Trial Court condoned the
delay, observing that the applica,on had been filed within limita,on from
the date of knowledge. The said order was never set aside.
7. However, a(cid:24)er framing issues and recording evidence of both
sides, the Trial Court dismissed the applica,on under Order IX Rule 13 CPC
vide order dated 14.02.2024 (Annexure P-1), holding the applica,on to be
barred by limita,on and not maintainable at the instance of the respondent.
8. Not sa,sfied with the order of the trial court, respondent
approached the appellate court. The appeal filed by the respondent was
Page 2 of 7
2 of 7
::: Downloaded on - 31-01-2026 09:08:43 :::
##PAGE3##CR No.294 of 2026 2026:PHHC: 012937
allowed by the learned Addi,onal District Judge, Gurgaon vide the impugned
judgment dated 29.11.2025 (Annexure P-2), which has given rise to the
present revision.
9. Conten(cid:6)ons : Learned senior counsel for the pe,,oners submits:
(i) The defendant was duly served through refusal and subs,tuted
service, and therefore the ex parte proceedings were legal. Reference is also
made to proviso to Order IX Rule 13 CPC to contend that even if there was
irregularity of service, that cannot be a ground to set aside ex-parte decree.
(ii) The applica,on under Order IX Rule 13 CPC was hopelessly
barred by limita,on, as defendant was duly served; the decree was passed on
19.09.2012 and muta,on in favour of the plain,ffs based on the decree was
sanc,oned on 18.01.2013.
(iii) The respondent had construc,ve knowledge of the decree at
least on 10.06.2013, when muta,on of the Will was sanc,oned, and
therefore the plea of knowledge on 03.03.2014 is false.
(iv) The respondent was not a party to the suit and was a stranger
thereto; hence, he had no locus standi to move an applica,on under Order IX
Rule 13 CPC.
(v) The appellate court exceeded its jurisdic,on and re-appreciated
evidence like a first court of appeal, warran,ng interference under Ar,cle
227.
10. Per contra, learned senior counsel for the respondent contends:
(i) The service of summons on the defendant Banwari was contrary
to Order V Rules 9 and 21 of CPC, as the defendant was residing outside the
territorial jurisdic,on of the Trial Court.
(ii) The delay stood already condoned by a judicial order dated
21.04.2014, which aDained finality; hence, the Trial Court had no jurisdic,on
to re-open the issue.
Page 3 of 7
3 of 7
::: Downloaded on - 31-01-2026 09:08:43 :::
##PAGE4##CR No.294 of 2026 2026:PHHC: 012937
(iii) Knowledge of muta,on proceedings cannot be equated with
knowledge of an ex parte civil decree, especially
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.