NOOR MOHAMMAD Vs. 1ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE RAEBARELI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHASHI Kant Gupta, J. This is a writ petition for quashing the im pugned orders dated 13. 1. 2005 passed by respondent No. 1, and 10. 2. 2004 and 10. 9. 1996, passed by respondent No. 2.

(2.) THE factual background in a nut-shell as follows : THE respondent No. 3 (hereinafter referred to as 'landlord') filed a S. C. C. Suit No. 3 of 1987 against the petitioner No. 1 and his father for recovery of arrears of rent and enactment on the ground that the landlord is owner of the property in dispute and was in the tenancy of petitioner No. 1 @ 312. 50 per month and the petitioner No. 1 neither paid rent nor electric dues etc. , since 1. 8. 1986.

(3.) AFTER the rejection of the applications of petitioner Nos. 2 to 5 under Order IX, Rule 13, C. P. C. , petitioner No. 1 thereafter filed an application un der Order IX, Rule 13'of C. P. C. for setting aside ex parte decree dated 10. 9. 1996 on 3. 12. 1999, after the expiry of more than three years wherein it was alleged that after the evidence of the parties was closed, the matter was fixed for ar gument but his Counsel did not inform him about the development of the case, as such he could not know about ex parte hearing. It was only on 1. 11. 1999, he came to know about ex parte decree when he was asked by the plaintiff to va cate the shop. He immediately thereafter contacted his Counsel on 2. 12. 1999, who moved an application for inspection of the record on the next date i. e. , 3. 12. 1999. Learned Counsel inspected the record and moved an application on 3. 12. 1999 for recalling the ex parte judgment and decree. The Trial Court vide order dated 10. 8. 2004 dismissed the restoration application of the petitioner No. 1. Thereafter Revision No. 6 of 2004 was filed against the rejection of restoration application and the said revision was also dismissed by First Additional District Judge, Raebareli. Hence this writ petition.