KAMALBIR SINGH Vs. NARBIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dtd. 1/11/2021 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Gurugram, which was upheld by the lower appellate Court vide order dtd. 31/3/2022.

(2.) Mr. Amit Jain, learned senior counsel for the petitioner contends that it was a matter of record that service upon the petitioner in the partition proceedings was not effected and infact the aforementioned proceedings were carried out behind his back. He argued that in the partition proceedings, the petitioner was initially proceeded against ex-parte vide order dtd. 11/10/2013, which was later set aside vide order dtd. 17/11/2016, on a handwritten application moved by an Advocate who had not even been engaged by the petitioner. He further contends that on 16/1/2017 Sanad Takseem was ordered to be prepared on the basis of a consent statement made by the same Advocate, who put in an appearance on behalf of the petitioner without being appointed by him. While drawing the attention of this Court to the application filed by the Advocate for setting aside the ex-parte order (Annexure P3) and the power of attorney (Annexure P4), learned senior counsel vehemently contends it is clear even to the naked eye that the alleged signatures of the petitioner on both these documents do not match with his actual signatures.

(3.) While inviting attention of this Court to the Rapat Roznamcha No.864 annexed as Annexure P5, learned senior counsel submits that strangely date of the order vide which the warrants of possession qua the land in dispute were issued by the Assistant Collector, Second Grade has not been mentioned therein. He thus, submits that the collusion between the private defendants and the defendant-revenue authorities is further apparent and discernible from the fact that when the petitioner applied for obtaining certified copies of the files of partition proceedings, his application was returned with the report that there were no entries with respect to those case files in the register. Learned senior counsel submits that interestingly, the respondents produced the certified copy of the files of partition proceedings along with their written statements.