Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O. V, r. 20

Law: Limitation Act (IX of 1908)

Section: 3, 164

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) O. V, r. 20-Substituted service-Orders for substituted service by means of publication in newspaper duly signed by trial Court and ex pane proceedings taken on defendant's non-appearance-Order of first appellate Court holding defendant having not been duly served due to an earlier order for effecting substituted service having not been signed by trial Court, in circumstances, held, incorrect and service effected on defendant by virtue of order subsequently passed not illegal. (b) Limitation Act (1X of 1908)  S. 3 read with Art. 164-Limitation-Summons not properly served on defendant and case decided against defendant ex parte -Limitation for appeal, in circumstances, held, starts from date of knowledge of ex parte decree on part of defendant.-[Limitation [Appeal (civil)]. Date of hearing : 18th July, 1979.                                                                                                                                   ORDER This second appeal is filed against the decision of the learned District Judge, Mirpur dated 15-2-1978 by which the order dated 30-4-1977 of the Sub-Judge, Mirpur was set aside, which was in favour of the appellant holding therein that the application filed by the respondent for cancellation of the ex parte decree dated 3-4-1972 against him was beyond the period of limitation prescribed for filing an application for setting aside the ex parts decree. A declaratory suit in respect of the land in suit was brought in the Court of Sub-Judge, Mirpur by the plaintiff-appellant against Farid Khan respondent and some others. Those others are not the contestant. That suit was heard ex-parse and an ex parte decree dated 30-4-72 was passed thereof in favour of the plaintiff-appellant. It was on that that application for cancellation of the said ex parte decree was made by…