In the case at hand, the Appellant filed a suit seeking a decree of specific performance of an agreement to sell. An ex-parte decree was passed by the Civil Court. Later, the 1 st Respondent filed an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the CPC for setting aside the ex- parte decree along with an application for condonation of delay. However, this was dismissed by the Court.
Subsequently, the 1 st respondent filed a Civil Revision Petition under Section 115 of the CPC before the High Court. The High Court set aside the order of the lower court which also implies that the petition filed under Order IX Rule 13 CPC which had also stood dismissed was allowed by the High Court.

Whether a Civil Revision Petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is maintainable against the dismissal of an application filed under Order IX Rule 13 of the CPC?

The Court observed that “When an application or petition filed under Order IX Rule 13 CPC is dismissed, the defendant can avail a remedy by preferring an appeal in terms of Order XLIII Rule 1 CPC. Thus, Civil Revision Petition under Section 115 of the CPC would not arise when an application/petition under Order IX Rule 13 CPC is dismissed. Thus, when an alternative and effective appellate remedy is available to a defendant, against an ex-parte decree, it would not be appropriate for the defendant to resort to filing of revision under Section 115 of the CPC challenging the order refusing to set aside the order of setting the defendant ex parte.”

The Supreme Court held that a Civil Revision Petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is not maintainable against the dismissal of an application filed under Order IX Rule 13 of the CPC to set aside an ex-parte decree.