LAWS(P&H)-2012-2-106

GRAM PANCHAYAT, JALOTA Vs. MANHATI @ MANHI

Decided On February 27, 2012
Gram Panchayat, Jalota Appellant
V/S
Manhati @ Manhi Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant -petitioner has field this revision petition against the order dated May 26, 2010 passed by Additional District Judge, Sonepat, dismissing the application of the petitioner -Gram Panchayat for condonation of delay of six months in filing of the appeal.

(2.) THE plaintiff -respondents had filed a suit to restrain defendant -respondents No.13 and 14 for declaration, mandatory injunction and permanent injunction challenging the mutation, changing the nature of the land in dispute from cremation ground and Hadwara to Gair Mumkin Banjar Qadim. An injunction was sought against the defendant -respondents 1,2, 13 and 14 to construct a road on the property in dispute. Petitioner -defendant No.3 had filed a separate written statement taking up specific plea that the suit was not maintainable and that the civil Court had no jurisdiction. The locus standi of the plaintiff -respondents to file the suit had also been challenged. The maintainability of the suit, as per the provisions of Order 1 Rule 8 CPC was also challenged.

(3.) APPEAL was filed by the petitioner aggrieved by the judgment and decree after a delay of six months taking up the plea that delay had taken place on account of the election of Gram Panchayat. It was pleaded in the application that the Gram Panchayat was proceeded against ex - parte on November 25, 2005 and had contested the case through previous Sarpanch in collusion with the plaintiff - respondents No.1 to 8. When the present Gram Panchayat came to learn about the passing of impugned judgment and decree dated October 21, 2009 only on April 1, 2010 on receipt of notice in execution petition, the Gram Panchayat passed a resolution authorizing Sarpanch Devender Singh to apply for the certified copy of judgment and decree which was supplied on April 15, 2010. The application was contested on the ground that the Gram Panchayat was represented by Ex -Sarpanch and that the present Sarpanch had been negligent in pursuing the case despite knowledge. The lower Appellate Court vide impugned judgment and decree dated 21.10.2009 formed an opinion that Ex -Sarpanch Satbir Singh and present Ghanshyam Dass were fully aware of the pendency of the suit. The Gram Panchayat was proceeded against ex -parte in the year 2005 and the judgment and decree had been passed in the year 2009. It was not expected that for four years, the Gram Panchayat was not aware of the proceedings or the final decree.