IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 03.11.2025 HARWINDER SINGH ......Petitioner Vs KAPOOR SINGH ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. Ajay Pal Singh Rehan, Advocate for the petitioner (through V.C.).

Mr. L.M. Gulati, Advocate for the respondent.

****

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral)

[1]. By way of present revision petition, challenge has been laid to the orders dated 18.05.2017 (Annexure P-2) and 26.04.2018 passed by the learned Courts below, whereby the application preferred at the instance of petitioner under Order 9 Rule 13 of CPC seeking setting aside the ex-parte judgment and decree dated 03.09.2014 stands dismissed.

[2]. Briefly stating, respondent filed a suit of permanent injunction against the petitioner-defendant No.1 as well as one Gurjit Singh. In the said suit, the petitioner-defendant No.1 was served through her daughter namely Simarjit Kaur on 14.01.2014, who was major at the relevant time. The service report in this regard is extracted hereunder:-

“Sir, It is requested that my father Harwinder Singh is residing at Mumbai and he visits home once or twice in a year.

Sd./- Simerjit Kaur d/o Harwinder Singh.

It is requested that I reached village Bhangwan for effecting service of summons but Harwinder Singh did not meet at home, his daughter namely Simerjit Kaur met at home, who orally stated that her father resides at Mumbai and rarely comes here. She has given in writing also. Gurjit Singh was present at home but he refused to receive the summons after reading the same and copy of the plaint, he did not give anything in writing. Affixation of copy of summons has been made. Report submitted.

Sd./- Narinder Kumar Process Server, 14.01.2014.

Thereafter Gurjit Singh went somewhere on his motorcycle PB 02CD

1168.

Witness: L.T.I. Chowkidar Rattan Singh son of Gura Singh Village Bhagwan.

I, solemnly affirm and declare that my report is true and correct.

Sd./- Narinder Kumar Process Server, 14.01.2014 Affidavit attested.

Sd./- Civil Judge, Sr. Div. ASR.”

[3]. Having failed to appear before the learned Trial Court despite due service, the petitioner/defendant No.1 was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 05.02.2014. Subsequently the suit filed at the instance of the respondent- plaintiff was decreed ex-parte vide judgment and decree dated 03.09.2014. The relevant extract thereof is extracted hereunder:-

“ It is ordered that the suit filed by the plaintiff is hereby decreed ex-

parte in favour of plaintiff by granting decree for permanent injunction, thereby restraining the defendants from Interfering with the peaceful, physical, exclusive possession of the plaintiff or from dispossessing him from the property marked as A.B.C.D. shown in red colour in the site- plan which falls in Kh. 46R/25; khatauni 147 khewat 69 jamabandi for year 2011-2012 and same is bounded as by East: property of kapoor Singh, West: road, North: land of Gurjeet Singh, South, property of Baldev Singh as situated at village Bhangwan H.B 326 sub tehsil Majitha, tehsil / District Amritsar illegally, forcibly, unlawfully without due course of law and in any manner whatsoever. There shall be no order as to cost.”

[4] On 09.12.2014, the petitioner/defendant No.1 moved an application invoking Order 9 Rule 13 CPC read with Section 151 CPC seeking setting aside the ex-parte judgment and decree dated 03.09.2014 while alleging that no valid service was ever effected upon the petitioner/defendant No.1 in the suit by the learned Trial Court before proceedings against him as ex-parte. The said application was opposed at the instance of the respondent/plaintiff and the was ultimately dismissed by the learned Trial Court vide order dated 18.05.2017. Aggrieved thereof, petitioner/defendant No.1 preferred an appeal, however the same came to be dismissed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Amritsar on 26.04.2018. Hence the present revision petition has been filed assailing both the aforementioned orders.

[5]. I have hea