In any case in which a decree is passed ex parte against a defendant, he may apply to the Court by which the decree was passed for an order to set it aside; and if he satisfies the Court that the summons was not duly served, or that he was prevented by any sufficient cause from appearing when the suit was called on for hearing, the Court shall make an order setting aside the decree as against him upon such terms as to costs, payment into Court or otherwise as it thinks fit, and shall appoint a day for proceeding with the suit; Provided that where the decree is of such a nature that it cannot be set aside as against such defendant only it may be set aside as against all or any of the other defendants also: [Provided further that no Court shall set aside a decree passed ex parte merely on the ground that there has been an irregularity in the service of summons, if it is satisfied that the defendant had notice of the date of hearing and had sufficient time to appear and answer the plaintiff's claim] [ Added by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1976, Section 72 (w.e.f.1.2.1977).] [Explanation.-Where there has been an appeal against a decree passed ex parte under this rule, and the appeal has been disposed of an any ground other than the ground that the appellant has withdrawn the appeal, no application shall lie under this rule for setting aside that ex parte decree.] [Inserted by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1976, Section 72 (w.e.f. 1.2.1977).]

High Court Amendments-[Allahabad].-Add the following further proviso: "Provided also that no such decree shall be set aside merely on the ground ofirregularity in the service of summons if the Court is satisfied that the defendant knew, or but for his wilful conduct would have know, of the date of hearing in sufficient time to enable him to appear and answer the plaintiff's claim." [Andhra Pradesh].-Same as that of Madras. [Assam].-Same as that of Calcutta. [Bombay].-In Order IX, for the existing rule 13 and its marginal note, substitute the following as rule 13 and marginal note: "13. Setting aside decree ex parte against defendant.-In any case in which a decree is passed ex parte against a defendant, he may apply to the Court by which the decree was passed for an order to set it aside; and if he satisfies the Court that the summons was not duly served, or that there was sufficient cause for his failure to appear when the suit was called on for hearing, the Court shall make an order setting aside the decree as against him upon such terms as to costs, payment into Court or otherwise as it thinks fit, and shall appoint a day for proceeding with the suit:' Provided that where the decree is of such a nature that it cannot be set aside as against such defendant only, it may be set aside as against all or any of the other defendants also: Provided also that no such decree shall be set aside merely on the ground ofirregularity of service of summons, if the Court is satisfied that the defendant knew, or but for his wilful conduct would have known, of the date of hearing in sufficient time to enable him to appear and answer the plaintiff's claim. Explanation I.-Where a summons has been served under Order 5, rule 15, on an adult male member having an interest adverse to that of the defendant in the subject-matter of the suit, it shall not be deemed to have been duly served within the meaning of this rule. Explanation II.-Where there has been an appeal against a decree passed ex parte under this rule, and the appeal has been disposed of on any ground other than the ground that the appellant has withdrawn the appeal, no application shall lie under this rule for setting aside that ex parte decree."-(1-10-1983). [Calcutta].-Re-number rule 13 as rule 13 (1) and add the following as rule 13(2): "(2) The defendant shall, for service on the opposite party, present along with his application under this rule either (i) as many copies thereof on plain paper as there are opposite parties; or (ii) if the Court by reason of the length of the application or the number of opposite parties or for any other sufficient reason grants permission in this behalf a like number of concise statements." [Delhi].-Same as that of Punjab. [Gujarat].-Same as that of Punjab-(17-8-1961). [Himachal Pradesh].-Same as that of Punjab. [Karnataka].-Add the following further proviso to rule 13: "Provided further that no such decree shall be set aside merely on the ground of irregularity in the service of summons, if the Court is satisfied that the defendant knew the date of hearing in sufficient time to enable him to appear and answer the plaintiff's claim."-(R.O.C. No. 2526/1959, dated 9-2-1967). [Kerala].-In Order 9, for rule 13, the following shall be substituted, namely: "13. (1) In any case in which a decree is passed ex parte against a defendant he may apply to the Court by which the decree was passed for an order to set it aside; and if he satisfies the Court that the summons was not duly served, or that he was prevented by any sufficient cause from appearing when the suit was called on for hearing, the Court shall make an order setting aside the decree as against him upon such terms as to costs, payment into Court or otherwise as it thinks fit, and shall appoint a day for proceeding with this suit: Provided that where the decree is of such a nature that it cannot be set aside as against such defendant only it may be set aside as against all or any of the other defendants also after notice to them: Provided further that no Court shall set aside a decree passed ex parte merely on the ground that there has been an irregularity in the service of summons, if it is satisfied that the defendant had notice of the date of hearing in sufficient time to appear and answer the plaintiff's claim. (2) The provisions of section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908, shall apply to applications under sub-rule (1)."-(9-6-1959). [Madhya Pradesh].-(a) Existing rule 13 shall be re-numbered as sub-rule (1) and for the words "he was prevented by any sufficient cause from appearing" the words "there was sufficient cause for his failure to appear" shall be substituted. Add the following as an additional proviso and Explanation to rule 13(1): "Provided also that no such decree shall be set aside merely on the ground of irregularity in the services of summons, if the Court is satisfied that the defendant knew, or but for his wilful conduct would have known, of the date of hearing in sufficient time to enable him to appear and answer the plaintiff's claim. Explanation.-Where a summons has been served under Order 5, rule 15, on an adult male member having an interest adverse to that of the defendant in the subject-matter of the suit, it shall not be deemed to have been duly served within the meaning of this rule." (b) after sub-rule (1), so re-numbered the following shall be inserted as sub-rule (2) namely: "(2) The provisions of section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act (IX of 1908), shall apply to applications under sub-rule (1)."-(16-9-1960). [Madras].-Re-number rule 13 as rule 13(1). Insert the following as proviso to sub-rule (1) of rule 13 of Order 9: "Provided further that no Court shall set aside a decree passed ex parte merely on the ground that there has been an irregularity in the service of summons, if it be satisfied that the defendant had notice of the date of hearing in sufficient time to appear and answer the plaintiff's claim." Add the following as sub-rule (2) to rule 13: "(2) The provisions of section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908, shall apply to applications under sub-rule (1)." [Orissa].-Add the following: "Explanation 11.-A summons served under Order 5, rule 1 on an adult male member having an interest adverse to that of the defendant in the subject-matter of the suit shall not be deemed to have been duly served within the meaning of this rule."-(14-5-1984). [Punjab].-Rule 13 shall be numbered as rule 13(1) and the following sub-rule (2) shall be added to it, namely: "(2) The provisions of section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908, shall apply to applications made under sub-rule (1)."

In any case in which a decree is passed ex parte against a defendant, he may apply to the Court by which the decree was passed for an order to set it aside; and if he satisfies the Court that the summons was not duly served, or that he was prevented by any sufficient cause from appearing when the suit was called on for hearing, the Court shall make an order setting aside the decree as against him upon such terms as to costs, payment into Court or otherwise as it thinks fit, and shall appoint a day for proceeding with the suit; Provided that where the decree is of such a nature that it cannot be set aside as against such defendant only it may be set aside as against all or any of the other defendants also: [Provided further that no Court shall set aside a decree passed ex parte merely on the ground that there has been an irregularity in the service of summons, if it is satisfied that the defendant had notice of the date of hearing and had sufficient time to appear and answer the plaintiff's claim] [ Added by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1976, Section 72 (w.e.f.1.2.1977).] [Explanation.-Where there has been an appeal against a decree passed ex parte under this rule, and the appeal has been disposed of an any ground other than the ground that the appellant has withdrawn the appeal, no application shall lie under this rule for setting aside that ex parte decree.] [Inserted by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1976, Section 72 (w.e.f. 1.2.1977).]

High Court Amendments-[Allahabad].-Add the following further proviso: "Provided also that no such decree shall be set aside merely on the ground ofirregularity in the service of summons if the Court is satisfied that the defendant knew, or but for his wilful conduct would have know, of the date of hearing in sufficient time to enable him to appear and answer the plaintiff's claim." [Andhra Pradesh].-Same as that of Madras. [Assam].-Same as that of Calcutta. [Bombay].-In Order IX, for the existing rule 13 and its marginal note, substitute the following as rule 13 and marginal note: "13. Setting aside decree ex parte against defendant.-In any case in which a decree is passed ex parte against a defendant, he may apply to the Court by which the decree was passed for an order to set it aside; and if he satisfies the Court that the summons was not duly served, or that there was sufficient cause for his failure to appear when the suit was called on for hearing, the Court shall make an order setting aside the decree as against him upon such terms as to costs, payment into Court or otherwise as it thinks fit, and shall appoint a day for proceeding with the suit:' Provided that where the decree is of such a nature that it cannot be set aside as against such defendant only, it may be set aside as against all or any of the other defendants also: Provided also that no such decree shall be set aside merely on the ground ofirregularity of service of summons, if the Court is satisfied that the defendant knew, or but for his wilful conduct would have known, of the date of hearing in sufficient time to enable him to appear and answer the plaintiff's claim. Explanation I.-Where a summons has been served under Order 5, rule 15, on an adult male member having an interest adverse to that of the defendant in the subject-matter of the suit, it shall not be deemed to have been duly served within the meaning of this rule. Explanation II.-Where there has been an appeal against a decree passed ex parte under this rule, and the appeal has been disposed of on any ground other than the ground that the appellant has withdrawn the appeal, no application shall lie under this rule for setting aside that ex parte decree."-(1-10-1983). [Calcutta].-Re-number rule 13 as rule 13 (1) and add the following as rule 13(2): "(2) The defendant shall, for service on the opposite party, present along with his application under this rule either (i) as many copies thereof on plain paper as there are opposite parties; or (ii) if the Court by reason of the length of the application or the number of opposite parties or for any other sufficient reason grants permission in this behalf a like number of concise statements." [Delhi].-Same as that of Punjab. [Gujarat].-Same as that of Punjab-(17-8-1961). [Himachal Pradesh].-Same as that of Punjab. [Karnataka].-Add the following further proviso to rule 13: "Provided further that no such decree shall be set aside merely on the ground of irregularity in the service of summons, if the Court is satisfied that the defendant knew the date of hearing in sufficient time to enable him to appear and answer the plaintiff's claim."-(R.O.C. No. 2526/1959, dated 9-2-1967). [Kerala].-In Order 9, for rule 13, the following shall be substituted, namely: "13. (1) In any case in which a decree is passed ex parte against a defendant he may apply to the Court by which the decree was passed for an order to set it aside; and if he satisfies the Court that the summons was not duly served, or that he was prevented by any sufficient cause from appearing when the suit was called on for hearing, the Court shall make an order setting aside the decree as against him upon such terms as to costs, payment into Court or otherwise as it thinks fit, and shall appoint a day for proceeding with this suit: Provided that where the decree is of such a nature that it cannot be set aside as against such defendant only it may be set aside as against all or any of the other defendants also after notice to them: Provided further that no Court shall set aside a decree passed ex parte merely on the ground that there has been an irregularity in the service of summons, if it is satisfied that the defendant had notice of the date of hearing in sufficient time to appear and answer the plaintiff's claim. (2) The provisions of section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908, shall apply to applications under sub-rule (1)."-(9-6-1959). [Madhya Pradesh].-(a) Existing rule 13 shall be re-numbered as sub-rule (1) and for the words "he was prevented by any sufficient cause from appearing" the words "there was sufficient cause for his failure to appear" shall be substituted. Add the following as an additional proviso and Explanation to rule 13(1): "Provided also that no such decree shall be set aside merely on the ground of irregularity in the services of summons, if the Court is satisfied that the defendant knew, or but for his wilful conduct would have known, of the date of hearing in sufficient time to enable him to appear and answer the plaintiff's claim. Explanation.-Where a summons has been served under Order 5, rule 15, on an adult male member having an interest adverse to that of the defendant in the subject-matter of the suit, it shall not be deemed to have been duly served within the meaning of this rule." (b) after sub-rule (1), so re-numbered the following shall be inserted as sub-rule (2) namely: "(2) The provisions of section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act (IX of 1908), shall apply to applications under sub-rule (1)."-(16-9-1960). [Madras].-Re-number rule 13 as rule 13(1). Insert the following as proviso to sub-rule (1) of rule 13 of Order 9: "Provided further that no Court shall set aside a decree passed ex parte merely on the ground that there has been an irregularity in the service of summons, if it be satisfied that the defendant had notice of the date of hearing in sufficient time to appear and answer the plaintiff's claim." Add the following as sub-rule (2) to rule 13: "(2) The provisions of section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908, shall apply to applications under sub-rule (1)." [Orissa].-Add the following: "Explanation 11.-A summons served under Order 5, rule 1 on an adult male member having an interest adverse to that of the defendant in the subject-matter of the suit shall not be deemed to have been duly served within the meaning of this rule."-(14-5-1984). [Punjab].-Rule 13 shall be numbered as rule 13(1) and the following sub-rule (2) shall be added to it, namely: "(2) The provisions of section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908, shall apply to applications made under sub-rule (1)."