MANOJ KUMAR VYAS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JUDGMENT <DJG>V.NATH,J.</DJG> 1.Heard Mr. Manojeshwar Prasad Sinha, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing for the different sets of opposite parties including the opposite party-State of Bihar.

(2.) This revision application has been filed against the order dated 30.03.2010 passed in Miscellaneous Case No. 20/2003 by which the learned court below has dismissed the miscellaneous case mainly on the ground of bar of limitation and also giving findings on the merits as well.

(3.) The facts relevant in the present context are that a T.S.No. 12/1989 was filed by the petitioners for declaration of their right, title, interest and possession over the suit land along with consequential reliefs. However, this suit was dismissed for default on 18.01.1996 for non-compliance of the order for filing the requisites for registered notice. From the order dated 18.01.1996 (Annexure-1) it transpires that on the said date neither the plaintiffs nor the defendants were present when the suit was called out. Thereafter the plaintiffs filed Miscellaneous Case No. 09/1996 for restoration of the suit under Order 9, Rule 4 C.P.C. However, this Miscellaneous Case No. 09/1996 was also dismissed for default for non-appearance of the plaintiff-petitioner on 12.09.2003 (Annexure-2). Thereafter the plaintiffs filed Miscellaneous Case No. 20/2003 praying for restoration of the Miscellaneous Case No. 09/1996. This miscellaneous Case was filed on 14.11.2003 under the provision of Sec. 151 C.P.C. A petition for condonation of delay was also filed under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act. By the impugned order the learned court below has held that the Miscellaneous Case has been filed beyond the prescribed period of 30 days and no sufficient cause has been established by the plaintiff-petitioner. for condonation of delay. The learned court below has also made observations expressing doubts over the case of the plaintiffs for restoration as pleaded. Accordingly, the miscellaneous case has been dismissed by the impugned order.