PUNJAB WAKF BOARD, AMBALA CANTT Vs. MEHAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff is in revision aggrieved against the order dated 5.10.2002 passed by the learned trial Court whereby the suit was dismissed against defendants No. 6 to 8 for non-filing of process fee and Munadi expenses as well as order dated 10.9.2003 whereby the application for recalling of the order dated 5.10.2002 under Order 9 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure was dismissed.

(2.) IT is the case of the plaintiff that defendants No. 6 to 8 were served on 26.9.2002 but the said service was not considered satisfactory and the case was adjourned to 5.10.2002 for effecting service by way of Munadi. Since the process fee and Munadi expenses could not be deposited, the suit was dismissed against defendants No. 6 to 8 in terms of Order 9 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The subsequent application has also been dismissed without adverting to the fact that defendants No. 6 to 8 were, in fact, served.

(3.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties, I find that the orders passed by the learned trial Court on 5.10.2002 and subsequently on 10.9.2003 are not justified in law. It has not been found that the plaintiff was contumaciously negligent in prosecuting the case. The mere default of non- filing of process fee and Munadi fee etc., on one date of hearing should not entail dismissal of suit under Order 9 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The said fact was brought to the notice of the trial Court but the learned trial Court has declined to recall the order which is wholly unjustified.