SMT. KAVITA Vs. SMT. RAJO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside order dated 1.3.2011, Annexure P1, vide which learned trial Court has dismissed the application filed by Petitioner under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Code') seeking rejection of the petition filed by Respondent on the plea that the same was not filed within prescribed period of limitation.

(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned order passed by learned trial Court. Facts relevant for the decision of present revision petition are that Respondent filed a petition under Section 176(4)(b) of Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, challenging election of present Petitioner as Panch of Village Mandori. Notice was issued to the present Petitioner, who filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code for rejection of the petition on the ground that the period of limitation prescribed for filing of application is 30 days and, however, the petition was filed beyond the prescribed period of 30 days. The request has been declined by learned trial Court after observing as under:

(3.) IT has been contended be learned Counsel for the Petitioner that period of limitation expired on 6.7.2010 and, however, the petition has been filed on 16.7.2010.