GANESH KESHA HANATH Vs. KANTABEN LAXMAN HANATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-original plaintiff has tiled this petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India praying for quashing and setting aside the order dated 21-4-2005 Annexure F to the petition, rendered by the learned Joint District Judge and Fast Track Court, Gandhidham-Kutchh in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 9 of 2002 whereby he has allowed the appeal and quashed and set aside the order passed by the learned trial Judge below an application Exh. 5 in Regular Civil Suit No. 72 of 2000.

(2.) This Court has issued notice on 7-9-2005. On 15-9-2005, this Court has observed on the basis of the submissions made by learned Advocate Mr. Harin Raval for the petitioner that other side has refused to accept the process of the Court when she was attempted to be served by direct service. The Court, therefore, issued fresh notice for final disposal to the unserved respondent. On 7-10-2005, learned Advocate Mr. Bhushan B. Oza, has stated before the Court that he has an instruction to appear on behalf of respondent-Kantaben Wd/o. Lakhman Hanath who was present before the Court in person and he assured the Court to file his formal appearance in the matter. The Court, therefore, directed the Registry to show the name of Mr. Bhushan B. Oza, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent. On 10-10-2006, after hearing Mr. Raval, the Court has admitted the petition and rule was issued. However, nobody was present on behalf of the respondent.

(3.) The brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioner is the original plaintiff who instituted Regular Civil Suit No. 72 of 2000 in the Court of the learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Anjar-Kutchh against present respondent and the Mamlatdar, Bhachau-Kutchh, as defendants. In the said plaint, it is the case of the petitioner that he is the resident of village Vandhiya and since ancestral time is engaged in the occupation as an agriculturist and possesses agricultural land as owner. The respondent herein is also resident of the same village whose husband expired prior to some years. Both the petitioner and respondent belong to one family.