MAKSUDAN MISRA Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE BALLIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. U. Khan, J. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) O. S. No. 137 of 1975, Rameshwar Pande v. Surendra Misra & Ors. , was decided on the basis of Compromise on 24-3- 1975 by IIIrd Additional Munsif, Ballia (Compromise was dated 23- 3-1979 ). In the said suit, petitioner was one of the defendants. Respondents No. 5 to 8, who were also defendants in the said suit, are real brothers of the petitioner. The only other defendant in the suit was Sheo Shanker Pande, respondent No. 4. There were only these six defendants in the suit. Petitioner filed application for setting aside the compromise decree, which was registered as Misc. Case No. 42 of 1979. Copy of the Compromise or judgment and decree passed on the basis of compromise have not been annexed alongwith writ petition. The petitioner and one of his brothers had entered into Compromise through their Counsel Sri Ram Adhar Tiwari. The other three brothers had themselves signed the compromise. The petitioner came forward with the case in his restoration application that he had not signed the Vakalatnama. The petitioner did not adduce any expert evidence in respect of his alleged signatures on the Vakalatnama. The Trial Court compared the admitted and disputed signatures of the petitioner and found both of them to be exactly similar. In the absence of expert evidence or even in the presence of expert evidence, such course is open to the Court. The Trial Court/iiird Additional Munsif, Ballia, therefore rejected the petitioner's application on 8-4-1982. Against the said order, petitioner filed Civil Revision No. 118 of 1982. The A. D. J. , Ballia, dismissed the revision on 13-2-1986, hence this writ petition.

(3.) ACCORDINGLY, I do not find any error in the impugned orders. Writ petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed. .