KUMARI VIJAY LAKSHMI Vs. R P SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by Kumari Vijay Lakshmi under Article 227 of the Constitution and Section 115 and 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying that the order (Annexure D), dated 15-10-1969. passed by Shri R. P. Singh, Subordinate Judge, Delhi, rejecting a plaint filed by the petitioner, maybe quashed, and an appropriate direction be given that the suit be tried and heard on merits. The respondents to the petition are (1) Shri R. P. Singh, Subordinate Judge, Delhi. (2) Union of India, through Ministry of Home Affairs, and (3) Shri M. S. Nagra, Subordinate Judge Ambala. Shri Sant Ram, father of the petitioner appeared and argued the petition on behalf of the petitioner, and Shri B. N. Kirpal. Advocate, appeared for the respondents 1 & 2.

(2.) A suit, No. 446/67, was filed by one Virendra Kumar in the court of Shri R. L. Gupta, Subordinate Judge, Delhi, on the basis of a premissory note against one S. Banerji, and the same was decreed. On 8-10-1968, Virendra Kumar assigned the decree to the petitioner Kumari Vijay Lakshmi. The petitioner took out execution of the said decree, and on 24-1-1969, Shri M. S. Nagra, Subordinate Judge (respondent No. 3), in the course of rateable distribution of the assets of the Judgment-Debtor received in his court, adjudged the share of the petitioner. Kumari Vijay Lakshmi, at Rs. 380. He also directed Inc issuance of a cheque in favour of the petitoiner. On 30-1-1969. Shri R. L. Gupta, who passed the decree, sent a Robkar to the court of Shri M. S. Nagra regarding the assignment of the decree in favour of the petitioner. On lst February, 1969, the petitioner applied for the issuance of the cheque. The application was adjourned to 4-2-1962 then to 7-2-1969 and then to 7-3-1969. In the mean-time, on 12-2-1969, the Judgment-Debtor also filed an application stating that the amount may be paid to the petitioner (transferee decree-holder).

(3.) On 7-3-1969, Shri Nagra passed an order directing the issuance of a treasury voucher to the petitioner on condition that she furnishes a surely for the amount. On 18-3-1969 the petitioner tendered a surety bond of one Rup Lal in person and under protest, as there was a. reason for the imposition of the condition. But, the learned Subordinate Judge did not accept the surety bond so tendered, and directed orally that the surety bond may be filed in the Court Box in the regular course, along with an application for acceptance of the surety bond. The petitioner complied with the direction on that day itself. It is stated by Sant Ram that on 20-3-1969, Shri Nagra directed orally that the petitioner should produce on 21-3-1969 some proof that, she possessed some immovable properties, and that he (Sant Ram) as General Attorney of the petitioner, produced house tax receipts and other documents relating to a house belonging to the mother of the petitioner. But, the record does not show that such an oral direction was given by Shri Nagra on 20-3-1969. On 21-3-1969, Shri Nagra passed an order as under :-