Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

30. Thus, it is clear that in sale deed dated 26-04-2001, Sukhnandan had made categorical declaration that the property under sale is an ancestral property and accordingly, civil suit was filed on 09-05-2001. From order sheet dated 10-05-2001, it is clear that a direction was given by the Trial NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:15586 19 SA-560-2009 Court to serve the defendants today itself by special process server apart from service of notice by registered as well as ordinary modes. Thereafter, as per order sheet dated 19-05-2001, it was mentioned by the Trial Court, that the defendants were already served for their appearance on 17-05-2001, but since the Court was on leave, therefore, the reader had adjourned the case for 19-05-2001. Although the defendants had not appeared but it was held that since the case is not fixed for hearing, therefore, defendants cannot be proceeded ex-parte. Thus, it is clear that after the service of notice of suit, the defendants had realised that solemn declaration by Sukhnandan in sale deed dated 26-04-2001, that "the property in dispute is ancestral property"