KAILASHI DEVI Vs. DEVESH KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

(2.) It has also been alleged in the writ petition that neither the counsel for the petitioners nor the Tribunal had send any notice to the claimants/informant and proceeded ex parte against the petitioners and without considering the documentary as well as oral evidence of the petitioners, rejecting the claim of the claimants/petitioners vide an order dated 21.12.2010 on the ground that the claimants/petitioners could not prove their case. It has also been alleged that the said order had come into the knowledge of the petitioners on 6.12.2012 through counsel Sri Mahendra Pratap Singh. Thereafter, the petitioners had immediately moved recall application on 10.4.2012 under Order 9 Rule 9 of C.P.C. for setting aside the ex parte judgment and order dated 21.12.2010.

(3.) It has also been averred that the petitioners have also filed delay condonation application alongwith said application. Learned Tribunal vide order dated 9.10.2014 had rejected the application moved under Order 9 Rule 9 C.P.C., the same is being assailed by means of the present writ petition on various grounds.