In a suit for recovery instituted by A against B, despite the summons of suit having been duly served upon B, he did not appear on the date fixed in the summons on 1<sup>st</sup> March 1993. The court consequently on 1<sup>st</sup> March 1993 passed an ex parte order against B and listed the case for 3<sup>rd</sup> April 1993 for ex parte evidence of A.

Correct Answer: Both A and B are correct