KULDEEP SINGH Vs. VIRENDER SINGH AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 03.10.2009 (Annexure P/3) passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Charkhi Dadri, whereby application moved by the petitioner for recalling order dated 02.09.2005 has been dismissed. Brief facts relevant for disposal of this revision petition as averred in the petition are that the petitioner-plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and possession against the respondents-defendants. The said suit was a family dispute. Due to the intervention of the relatives and friends, the respondents-defendants allegedly agreed and assured the petitioner-plaintiff that they will retransfer the suit property in his name. There was an oral compromise between the parties in the presence of relatives and friends. Believing the assurance of the respondents defendants and relatives, the petitioner-plaintiff withdrew the aforesaid suit without liberty to file fresh suit on the same cause of action after 15 days of its filing and even before effecting of service on the respondents-defendants. The respondents-defendants did not abide by the oral compromise and assurance and resiled horn the compromise. Thereafter, the petitioner moved an application dated 21.08.2006 for recalling order dated 02.09.2005 and for restoration of the aforesaid suit for decision on merit. The said application was dismissed vide impugned order dated 03.10.2009 (Annexure P/3). Hence, this revision petition.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the suit was dismissed as withdrawn in view of oral compromise between the parties to the suit, even the services was not effected upon the respondents defendants. Admittedly, the suit was withdrawn without seeking permission to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action. Although, the petitioner moved an application after about one year, but no prejudice would be caused to any of the party if suit is restored; rather if the suit is not restored to its original number, injustice would be caused to the petitioner. The Court has inherent power to restore the suit under Section 151 CPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jet Ply Wood Private Limited and another v. Madhukar Nowlakha and others, 2006 AIR(SC) 1260 .