respondent No.2-Insurance Company, which was registered as claim petition No.214/2011. The said claim petition was decided ex-parte against the non-claimants vide judgment dated 23.02.2015. After that, when notice for execution was served to the non-claimants, then they contacted the advocates and obtained certified copies of the file. He further submits in claim petition, service of notice upon non-claimants No.1 and 2 was not properly effected. Service of notice was sought to be effected through registered AD for 04.04.2012 but registered AD was not on the record. So, on 04.04.2012, trial court directed for issuing fresh registered AD notice to non-claimants for 12.07.2012 but no fresh registered AD notices were filed, so, these notices were not issued. On 12.07.2012, the work was suspended, but claimant submitted the notices for effecting service through registered post. The trial court wrongly proceeded ex-parte against the nonclaimants on account of receipt of registered AD dated 04.04.2012. He further submits that trial court had no power to pass any order for ex-parte on the receipt of registered AD dated 04.04.2012. He further submits that the claimant had not sent the claim petition with registered post. So, it is a non-compliance of Order 5 Rule 2 CPC. On these grounds, the order dated 10.08.2017 and ex-parte judgment and decree against the nonclaimants be set aside.
