Uttarakhand High Court
Unknown vs Mr. Vikas Bahuguna on 16 January, 2014
Author: V.K. Bist
Bench: V.K. Bist
WPMS No. 137 of 2014 Hon'ble V.K. Bist, J.
Mr. Vikas Bahuguna, Advocate for the petitioners.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners on the urgency application, urgency application no. 257 of 2014 is allowed.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that suit of respondent, herein, for eviction and ejectment was decreed in favour of the respondent. Feeling aggrieved, father of the petitioners filed a civil appeal before the District Judge but the same was dismissed in default on 24.09.2009, as during the pendency of the appeal father of the petitioners died. Thereafter, respondent filed application for execution and petitioners moved application for restoration. Application for restoration filed by the petitioners was allowed and the civil appeal was restored to its original number. Thereafter, petitioners moved application for substitution but the same was rejected. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that application of the petitioners for substitution has wrongly been rejected on the ground of delay.
I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners.
Issue notice to respondent returnable within three weeks.
List on 19.02.2014 for admission / final disposal in the daily cause list.
Till next date of listing, further proceedings of Execution Case no. 1 of 2010 pending before learned Civil Judge (JD) Dehradun shall remain stayed.
Interim relief application no. 446 of 2014 stands disposed of.
(V.K. Bist, J.) Vacation Judge 16.01.2014 SKS