THAKUR DASS AND ORS. Vs. AMRIT LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COMPLAINT is that the impugned order passed by learned District Judge, Hamirpur in an application under Order 41 Rule 3 -A CPC and Section 5 of the Limitation Act registered as Civil Misc. Application No. 341 of 2012 dismissing thereby the application is contrary to the facts and circumstances of this case and also the evidence available on record. The same as such being not sustainable in the eyes of law has been sought to be quashed and set aside on the grounds inter alia that learned lower appellate Court has taken a hyper -technical approach in the matter and failed to understand the factum of the petitioner rustic villagers having no knowledge of legal formalities and interpretation of the orders/judgments passed by the Court of law and to the contrary disposed the petition in a cursory manner without application of mind. Also that the judgment and decree passed in the main suit was challenged by petitioners before learned lower appellate Court on several cogent and plausible grounds and also made out a clear -cut case for condonation of delay, however, the Court below without considering the same in its right perspective has dismissed the application in an unlawful manner.

(2.) IT is seen that the suit filed by the petitioners herein was decreed for the relief of permanent prohibitory injunction by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Nadaun vide judgment and decree dated 27th April 2009, whereas dismissed qua the relief of mandatory injunction. The allegations that the defendant -respondent raised construction over the land in dispute even after passing of interim injunction, contempt proceedings were initiated by the petitioners against him. The case as set out for seeking the relief of condonation of delay is that the petitioners came to know about the judgment and decree passed in the suit on 24.12.2011 when learned District Judge passed orders in contempt proceedings i.e. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 28 of 2011. It is thereafter they made an application for supply of certified copy of judgment and decree on 22.04.2012, which was made available to them on 28.04.2012. The record reveals that the appeal along with the application for condonation of delay was thereafter presented in the lower appellate Court on 14.5.2012. Learned lower appellate Court after taking on record the reply thereto has framed the following issues: - -

(3.) THE application therefore, was dismissed vide order impugned in this petition.