URMILA DEVI VARSHNEY Vs. GARIMA VARSHNEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This recall application has been made on behalf of Smt. Garima Varshney, respondent no. 1 in Matters under Article 227 No. 7723 of 2021, seeking recall of my final order dtd. 21/1/2022. By the said order, I had directed the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kasganj to decide the pending temporary injunction application in Original Suit No. 92 of 2021, Urmila Devi Varshney v. Garima Varshney and others, positively on the next date fixed, after hearing all parties to the suit. It was further ordered that in the event, for some reason, the temporary injunction application cannot be decided on the next date fixed, it shall be disposed of within fifteen days next.

(2.) Since the said order was passed without issuing notice to the private respondents, which was a course of action adopted because no rights by this Court inter partes were decided, it was thought wise to leave it open to the private respondents, who might feel aggrieved by the said order, to make an application in the decided petition.

(3.) Now, taking benefit of the opportunity granted, the respondent no. 1 to the petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, has made this application, asking for recall of the order dtd. 21/1/2022. The applicant seeks recall of the order primarily on the ground that the petitioner, who is a defendant to the suit, has, amongst other pleas, raised an objection about the suit to be grossly undervalued and the court fee paid insufficient. The Trial Court, however, without noticing the said plea at the preliminary stage, has proceeded with the suit and not yet framed an issue with regard to undervaluation or deficient court fee. A copy of the written statement filed in the suit on behalf of the applicant has been annexed to the recall application as Annexure No. 3.