HUKAM SINGH Vs. SARAVJIT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against order dt. 4/8/2022 passed by Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Ellenabad, vide which application filed by the revisionist/plaintiff for setting aside order dt. 14/12/2019 passed by SDJM/ACJSD-cum-Presiding Officer, National Lok Adalat, Ellenabad had been dismissed.

(2.) Briefly stated facts of the case are that plaintiff Hukam Singh, then aged 98 years had brought a suit against Saravjit Kaur, Jasveer Kaur, Veerpal Kaur as well as Sub Registrar, Rania, District Sirsa seeking a declaration that he is in cultivating possession of the land measuring 16K-0M situated at Village Rania, District Sirsa, however, defendant No.1 in collusion with defendants had suffered alleged sale deed No.853 dt. 24/5/2017 in favour of defendants No.2 and 3 and mutation has been sanctioned on the basis of that sale deed. According to the plaintiff, the sale deed and mutation sanctioned on the basis thereof are result of fraud, concealment of facts, misrepresentation etc., in effective qua rights of the plaintiff and liable to be set aside. In addition to that, the plaintiff sought relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants No.1 to 3 from interfering into peaceful cultivating possession of the plaintiff over the suit land.

(3.) Notice of the suit was given to the defendants. Defendants No.2 to 4 had put in appearance, whereas, defendant No.1 did not appear despite service and was proceeded against ex parte. During the pendency of the suit before Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) Ellenabad which was put up before the Court of Sh. Dushyant Chaudhary, Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Ellenabad in Lok Adalat and was dismissed as withdrawn, vide order dtd. 14/12/2019. Subsequently, the plaintiff filed an application before the trial Court seeking setting aside of order dt. 14/12/2019 and restoration of the suit contending that on account of his old age of 106 years, he had been residing with his son Bhagwan Singh. In the month of November, 2019 the applicant was taken by his another son Harnam Singh to his house. Thereafter, defendants No.1 to 3 with a mala fide intention and collusion with Harnam Singh took the plaintiff to Court premises at Ellenabad producing him before the Court where his thumb impression was obtained. Thereafter, plaintiff was taken by Harnam Singh with him where he spent next one month and thereafter, he was taken by Bhagwan Singh to his house. According to the applicant after that COVID-19 broke out and applicant/plaintiff could not contact his counsel. Subsequently when the plaintiff contacted his counsel and enquired about the proceedings of the case, he was told that his case had been dismissed as withdrawn, vide order dt. 14/12/2019, then realizing that his son Harnam Singh had played fraud with him by changing his counsel and then getting the suit withdrawn from him, when plaintiff had not compromised the matter out of his free will with the defendants. He had not made any statement for withdrawing the suit and thumb impression of plaintiff was obtained by Harnam Singh with the help of new counsel in collusion with the defendants. Therefore, order dt. 14/12/2019 be set aside.