Allahabad High Court
Sheetal Prasad Mishra vs Court Of Addl. District Judge,Court No. ... on 5 December, 2024
Author: Pankaj Bhatia
Bench: Pankaj Bhatia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:81149 Court No. - 7 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5829 of 2024 Petitioner :- Sheetal Prasad Mishra Respondent :- Court Of Addl. District Judge,Court No. 5 Gonda And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Madhur Kant Srivastava,Neeti Singh Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Madhur Kant Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the record.
3. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 30.08.2024 passed in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 6 of 2023 whereby the appeal preferred by the defendant to the suit under Order 43 Rule 1 was allowed.
4. The facts in brief are that the plaintiff (petitioner herein) filed a suit alleging that despite plaintiff having purchased property bearing Plot No. 1059/41, however the respondents were trying to interfere in the possession. The trial Court granted an injunction, however, the appellate Court while hearing the appeal had noticed that a compromise had taken place in between the parties. The appellate Court also noticed that neither the facts with regard to the compromise decree nor did the Civil Court going to the question that the property of the defendant was separate and distinct from the property of the plaintiff and on these grounds, the appeal was allowed.
5. Prima facie, from the perusal of the order passed by the trial Court as well as from the plaint, there appears to be no assertion with regard earlier suit which was compromised in between the parties, which was a material fact, which ought to have been placed before the trial Court, which were not done, thus, the appellate Court has rightly noticed the said question and has set aside the order of the trial Court dated 20.04.2022. No interference is called for against the said order. The petition lacks merits and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 5.12.2024 Arun