URSH MOHAMMAD Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) BRIEF facts giving rise to the instant writ petition are that a suit for permanent injunction has been filed by Tauheed Khan and others against the petitioners on 12.5.1981. The said Suit was decided ex parte against the defendants-petitioners vide order dated 26.7.1984. Thereafter, the petitioners moved an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC alongwith an affidavit under Section 5 of Limitation Act which was dismissed vide order dated 21.1.1998. Being aggrieved, they filed Misc. Civil Appeal No. 69 of 1998 which too was dismissed vide order dated 18.5.2009. Feeling aggrieved, the instant writ petition has been filed.

(3.) ACCORDING to the office report dated 21.7.2010, the opposite party nos.1 and 2 are represented by the learned Chief Standing Counsel. Service of notice on opposite party nos.3 to 12 is deemed sufficient under Chapter VIII Rule 12 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952.