DEUTSCHE RANCO GMBH Vs. MOHAN MURTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Confusion and complexities have been particularly confounded in the circumstances of this case, as a concise account thereof will disclose. Execution proceedings have been initiated by Deutsche Ranco GmbH against the Respondent, Shri Mohan Murti, who appears before us in person. On the hearing held on 20.3.2007, in EA No.356/2006 in Ex. No.58/1994, it has been minuted that - "Counsel for the decree holder submits that he has instructions to withdraw from the case. He submits that he would be moving an application for seeking discharge. At this request, adjourned to 07/08/2007". On the next date of hearing, EA No.356/2006 was once again listed for appropriate consideration of the Court. The Order passed on that date reads thus:-

(2.) Placed in this predicament, learned counsel for the Decree Holder filed EA No.36/2008 under Order IX Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC for short) for restoration of the Execution Petition. On 25.1.2008, the learned Single Judge was pleased to recall the Order dated 7.8.2007, taking support from H.K. Goods Transport Pvt. Ltd. vs Ramesh Chander Bammi, 2006 126 DLT 404 as well as Babu vs L. Dewan Singh, 1952 AIR(All) 749. The Dismissal Order was recalled without issuing notice to the Respondent/Judgment Debtor. Notice of EA No.356/2006 was thereupon ordered to be issued.

(3.) The Judgment Debtor/Respondent thereupon filed an Application seeking a Review of the Order dated 25.1.2008 by which the Dismissal had been recalled. The Review has been allowed by Order dated 28.7.2009, and it is these Orders which have been assailed before us.