SUKH DEV & ANR Vs. RAJPAL & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is directed against the orders dated 10.10.2012, 2.5.2014, 7.8.2014 and 15.1.2015, rendered by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Court No. 1, Dharamshala, Distt. Kangra, H.P., in Ex. Petition No. 19/1991.

(2.) "Key facts" necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that the predecessor-in-interest of the respondents, namely, Anant Ram has filed a Civil Suit bearing No. 205 of 1975 for declaration against the petitioners as well as proforma respondents on the basis of jamabandi for the year 1962-63. The suit was decreed by the learned trial Court on 30.7.1977. The judgment debtors and proforma respondents filed an appeal before the learned District Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala against the judgment dated 30.7.1977. The appeal preferred by proforma respondent Smt. Shakuntla was dismissed in default on 16.8.1980. The appeal preferred by judgment debtors was dismissed on merits on 16.8.1980 by the learned Addl. District Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala with a minor modification regarding Kh. No. 1836/619. The JDs also filed Regular Second Appeal before this Court. The Regular Second Appeal was dismissed by this Court on 9.3.1981. In the meantime, proforma respondent Smt. Shakuntla also filed application for restoration of the appeal. The appeal was restored and dismissed on merits on 25.11.1981.

(3.) The Civil Suit was instituted by the predecessor-in-interest of decree holders in the year 1975. It was decreed on 30.7.1977. The learned Addl. District Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala dismissed the appeal preferred by judgment debtors with a minor modification qua Kh. No. 1836/619. The regular second appeal filed by Smt. Shakuntla was also dismissed on merits by the first appellate Court on 25.11.1981. Two Regular Second Appeals preferred against the judgments and decrees dated 9.3.1981 and 25.11.1981 were also dismissed by this Court. Thus, the judgment and decree dated 30.7.1977 has attained finality. The objections earlier preferred by the judgment debtors /proforma respondents were also dismissed by the learned Executing Court. Since, neither the judgment debtors nor the proforma respondents appeared before the learned Executing Court, they were proceeded against ex-parte on 10.10.2012. An application was filed for setting aside the ex-parte order dated 10.10.2013, however, the fact of the matter is that there was no ex-parte order dated 10.10.2013. In fact, the order was dated 10.10.2012. The application was filed after a gap of about one year and nine months. The application filed was beyond the prescribed period of limitation. No sufficient reasons have been shown for condonation of the delay. The order dated 7.8.2014 is speaking order and is in conformity with the law.