VIRENDER SINGH Vs. NAGAR PARISHAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the circumstances of the case, counsel for the parties agree that the revision petition be heard on merits. Heard. Petitioner filed a suit challenging the order of dispossession passed by the Municipal Committee. Later on, State was added as party. After trial, the suit was dismissed on merits as well as on the ground that notice under Section 80 C.P.C. was not given nor leave under Section 80(2) C.P.C. had been obtained. The petitioner preferred an appeal, which is pending and during pendency of the appeal, an application was moved in terms of Section 80(2) C.P.C. which has been dismissed by the learned lower appellate Court. Hence this petition.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that application under Section 80(2) C.P.C. could not be moved in the trial court as initially State was not a party and subsequently there was oversight by the counsel and it will be in the interest of justice that appeal of the appellant is heard on merits and petitioner is not debarred from getting justice if he is otherwise entitled.

(3.) ACCORDINGLY , the impugned order rejecting the application under Section 80(2) C.P.C. is set aside and application filed by the petitioner for waiver of notice is allowed subject to payment of Rs. 5,000/- as costs, which shall be paid within one month from today before the lower appellate court and the same will be a condition precedent for hearing of the appeal. Petition is disposed of accordingly. Petition allowed.