PARMESHWARI Vs. SHYAMLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present civil revision has been filed by the applicants being aggrieved by the order dtd. 13/9/2022 (Annexure A/1), passed in Civil Suit No. 12-A/2022 by the learned Civil Judge Class-2, Nagri, District Dhamtari, whereby the application filed by the applicants under Order 9 Rule 9 of C.P.C., has been rejected.

(2.) Brief facts of the case as projected by the applicants are that the respondent No.1/plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration of title and for injunction against the defendants/applicants in respect of lands bearing khasra No. 7/2, 21/2, 33/1, 38/2, 38/4, 55/4, 73/1, 77/3, 103/2, 140/1, 143/1, 160/3, 189/2, 194/1, 197/1, 202/1, 202, 266/2, 276/1 situated at Village Mukundpur, P.H. No. 32, R.I.C. Sihawa, Tehsil Nagri, District Dhamtari (C.G.).

(3.) The aforesaid civil suit was registered as 156-A/2009 before the learned Civil Judge Class-2, Nagri, District Dhamtari and vide order dtd. 28/10/2013, the said civil suit was dismissed for nonprosecution. It is stated that inspite of knowledge of dismissal of previous suit, the respondent No.1 has not filed an application for restoration of civil suit No. 156-A/2009. After almost 11 years of dismissal of suit for want of prosecution, on 28/3/2022, the respondents No. 1 and 2/plaintiffs have filed subsequent suit for declaration of title, permanent injunction and for partition in respect of same subject property, stating therein that after dismissal of suit, the defendants have partitioned the subject property and no share has been given to the plaintiffs/respondents No.1 and 2. After service of notice, the applicants/defendants filed an application under Order 9 Rule 4 and Order 9 Rule 9 of C.P.C., stating therein that the earlier suit filed by the plaintiff/respondent No.1 in respect of same subject property has been dismissed for want of prosecution and the respondent No.1 has not moved any application for restoration of the previous suit, therefore, the earlier order dtd. 28/10/2013 has attained finality and therefore the subsequent suit is not maintainable. It was further submitted by the applicants that the present suit has been filed after almost 11 years from the dismissal of previous suit, which is time barred also and therefore the subsequent suit is not maintainable and the same is liable to be dismissed.