ARVIND KOHLI Vs. SUMEET WALIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision was filed along with Civil Revision Petition No. 111 of 2008 between the same parties. In that petition, the petitioners herein who are the judgment -debtors had challenged the dismissal of application for amendment of the decree passed against them. The facts are not being repeated here as I have charted the entire course of litigation between the parties in Civil Revision 111 of 2008 between the same parties and for the same property holding that the petitioners herein are guilty of gross abuse of the process of law.

(2.) TO recapitulate briefly, suit filed by respondent No. 1 Sumeet Walia, who is a paraplegic, was decreed by the learned Additional District Judge on 12.1.2006. Appeal preferred by the judgment -debtors herein to this Court being RFA 149 of 2006 was dismissed by this Court on 2.8.2006. CMPMO No. 38 of 2008 filed by the petitioners/judgment -debtors and others seeking review of this judgment was also dismissed on 7.3.2008 with the Court holding that the petition was nothing but an attempt to exclude the decree holder from the enjoyment under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure preferred by the judgment -debtors reagitating the controversy which had already been settled was dismissed on 25.6.2007. The precise ground taken was that the judgment -debtors -petitioners herein were entitled to the construction on a portion on the land which had been decreed in favour of the decree holder. Dismissal of these objections was confirmed by this Court on 6.8.2007 in Civil Revision No. 112 of 2007. During this period, review petition was preferred by the judgment -debtors before the learned Additional District Judge seeking review of the judgment passed in the civil suit. How and why this petition came to be filed is unclear as the judgment was affirmed by this court and review against that dismissed as noticed. However, even this review petition was dismissed on 3.3.2008. Undeterred the petitioners moved the trial Court again by a petition under Sections 151 and 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure on 11.3.2008 seeking amendment of the decree. This petition was dismissed on 7.5.2008 and Civil Revision 111 of 2008 has been preferred which has also been dismissed by a separate order. The obduracy of the petitioners -judgment -debtors persisted and civil suit 73/1 of 2007 was preferred in the Court of the learned District Judge again seeking a decree for the construction portion of Khasra No. 278 which suit was abandoned as unconditionally withdrawn on 11.7.2008.

(3.) CIVIL Suit 73/1 of 2007 was instituted in the Court of the Civil Judge, Court No. 1, Shimla on 22.12.2007 by both the judgment -debtors herein praying for a decree of injunction restraining the decree holders from interfering in the peaceful possession and ownership of land comprised in Khasra No. 278 and the constructed portion standing thereon. This suit was unconditionally abandoned by them on 11.7.2008 when a statement was made that the plaintiffs (petitioners herein) want to withdraw the suit and do not wish to pursue the matter any further.