RAM KUMAR Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri T.P. Bharadwaj holding brief of Shri Vishesh Kumar Gupta has made a request to adjourn the case. The matter was heard at great length on 5th August, 2010. On the request made by Shri Vishesh Kumar Gupta, the matter was adjourned for after lunch session in order to enable him to look into the decision referred to in the impugned judgment in Rani Choudhury v. Lt. Col Suraj Jit Choudhury.1 However, after lunch he did not appear. The matter was posted for today and again, adjournment has been sought. Prayer made is refused.

(2.) The sole controversy in this case is as to whether after dismissal of appeal filed against the decree, whether an application is maintainable under Order IX, Rule 13, Code of Civil Procedure The issue is clearly covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rani Choudhury (supra), wherein it has been held as under:

(3.) In the case in hand, suit filed by the Plaintiff -Respondent was decreed by the Trial Court by means of ex parte judgment and decree dated 10.10.1980, against which First Appeal was preferred by some of the Defendants, which was partly allowed on 15.7.1982. The matter came up to this Court in Second Appeal No. 2257 of 1982, which was also dismissed on 10.11.2005. The judgment and decree has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court by dismissal of the Special Leave Petition on 17.4.2006. Thereafter the Petitioner moved an application under Order IX, Rule 13 Code of Civil Procedure for recall of the ex parte judgment and decree on the allegation that they were also legal heirs of the deceased Defendants and were not impleaded after his death.