AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard.
By way of this writ petition, the petitioner herein has approached this Court for challenging the order Annex.3 dated 21.2.2007 passed by the Additional District Collector II, Jodhpur in revision petition no.76/2005 directing ex-parte proceedings against the petitioner so also, the order Annex.7 dated 22.12.2007 whereby, the application filed on behalf of the pertitioner under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC for setting aside the ex-parte proceedings was rejected.
Learned counsel for the petitioner urges that the notice of revision filed by the respondent no.2 for cancellation of patta issued in favour of the petitioner was never served personally and thus, the trial Court was totally unjustified in proceeding ex-parte against the petitioner.
None has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent no.2 despite service.
Mr.Salil Trivedi, learned counsel representing the respondent no.3 Gram Panchayat vehemently opposes the submissions advanced by the petitioner's counsel.
Having considered the arguments advanced at the Bar and upon going through the material available on record, this Court is of the firm opinion that the notice of the revision petition was not personally and properly served upon the petitioner. Attempt of the process server to effect service of notice by affixing the same on the very same first opportunity does not appear to be bonafide.
Furthermore, the report of service of notice is not attested by any witness. Thus, the trial Court while proceeding ex-parte wrongly observed that the service stood affected on the petitioner. In this view of the matter, the impugned orders are grossly illegal, perverse and suffering from error apparent on the face of record and cannot be sustained even for a moment.
Resultantly, the instant writ petition deserves to be and is hereby allowed. The impugned orders Annex.3 dated 21.2.2007 and Annex.7 dated 22.12.2007 are hereby struck down and set
aside. The matter is remitted back to the revisional Court who shall, after providing an appropriate opportunity of hearing to the parties, consider and decide the revision on merits as per law within a period of one year form the date of receipt of copy of this order.