Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Purshotam S/O Late Shri Balurmji Sharma vs Gopal Sahai Sharma S/O Late Shri Baluram ... on 27 May, 2022
Author: Sameer Jain
Bench: Sameer Jain
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 108/2022
1. Purshotam S/o Late Shri Balurmji Sharma, R/o House No.
14 And 15 , Khanna Colony, Outside Nehru Gate, Beawar
District Ajmer (Rajasthan)
2. Smt. Indu Sharma W/o Shri Purshotam, R/o House No.
14 And 15 , Khanna Colony, Outside Nehru Gate, Beawar
District Ajmer (Rajasthan)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Gopal Sahai Sharma S/o Late Shri Baluram Ji Sharma,
R/o House No. 14 And 15, Khanna Colony, Outside Nehru
Gate, Beawar , District Ajmer
2. Bhagwan Sahai S/o Late Shri Baluram Ji Sharma, R/o
House No. 13, Madav Colony, Kundan Nagar, Ajmer
3. Nagar Parishad, Beawar Through Commissioner Ajmer
4. State Of Rajasthan, Through Land Holder Tehsildar,
Beawar (Rajasthan0 District Ajmer
5. Up-Panjiyak, Up-Panjiyak Karayalay, Beawar District
Ajmer
6. State Of Rajasthan, Through District Collector, Ajmer
(Rajasthan)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Mehrish, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Order
27/05/2022
1. It is submitted by learned counsel for the
petitioners/applicants that the present revision petition is filed against the restoration order dated 05.04.2022 under Order IX Rule 9 read with Section 151 of CPC. It is submitted that on (Downloaded on 01/06/2022 at 08:31:43 PM) (2 of 3) [CR-108/2022] 11.07.2014, the plaintiff-respondent No.1 filed a suit for declaration, partition and injunction in the lower court. On 14.07.2016, an application was filed under Order XXXII Rule 15, Order XXXII A and Section 151 of CPC by Manju Sharma, wife of Gopal Sahay, stating that since Gopal Sahay was mentally incapable/sick and not in a position to pursue the case, the applicant, being wife of Gopal Sahay be allowed to pursue the case. In response to the same, a reply was submitted by the present applicant-petitioner for dismissal of the same. As per the applicant-petitioner, the application was not decided and was adjourned to 14.05.2019. On 14.05.2019, neither the plaintiff nor his/her counsel were present in the court when the case was called for hearing and the application was dismissed in default. On 08.04.2021, Smt. Manju Sharma filed an application under Order IX Rule 9 of CPC read with Section 151 of CPC for restoration of the case to its original number, the same was opposed by the applicant-petitioners but the learned trial court vide order dated 05.04.2022 allowed the same in the interest of justice, imposing cost of Rs.2,500/- by a detailed order.
2. Heard and considered the revision petition. It is an admitted fact that one application under Order XXXII Rule 15 and XXXII A, read with Section 151 of CPC was filed way back in the year 2016 on account of ill health of Gopal Sahay, the complainant in the matter, before the learned trial court. The said application was filed by his wife on account of his ill health/ mental health and it is also an admitted fact that on 14.05.2019, the matter was dismissed in default for want of appearance. It is also an admitted fact that for a long period of time, on account of Covid-19 pandemic, the courts were not functioning regularly and therefore (Downloaded on 01/06/2022 at 08:31:43 PM) (3 of 3) [CR-108/2022] Hon'ble Apex Court had also granted relaxation in the appearance, filing etc.
3. In the given circumstances without going into technicalities, the learned court below has restored back the matter which was dismissed in default on account of non- appearance of counsel and the plaintiff. The learned court has also imposed cost of Rs.2,500/- while allowing the same.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant-petitioners has submitted that the said restoration will affect his case while dealing with application filed under Order XXXII Rule 15 and under Order XXXII A read with Section 151 of CPC.
5. On perusal of the said submission, this court finds that in the order dated 05.04.2022 the learned Court has already held that the restoration will not affect the present applicant-petitioners qua proceeding under Order XXXII of CPC.
6. In light of above, present revision petition being devoid of merits, is dismissed.
(SAMEER JAIN),J JKP/11 (Downloaded on 01/06/2022 at 08:31:43 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)