ZAINEB BEGUM Vs. ABDUL AZIZ MIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For some people litigation is a passion and it is used as an engine of harassment to others. If one set of litigant has lost the litigation, the other group is kept ready for inflicting fresh dose of litigation knowing fully well the results. They tend to take chances and wait for the result that judicial administration might accept their point of view. The cycle of litigation might have ended in the higher courts unfavourably, yet a new beginning is made by initiating another judicial process. These are the basic features of the case in hand.

(2.) During the pendency of the suit, Ghulam Nabi Shah, respondent No. 5, without caring about the pendency of the civil suit, further executed a sale deed, dated 20.7.1991, which was registered in favour of Ali Mohammad, Mst. Mehra and Ghulam Mohi-ud-din, respondent Nos. 6, 7 and 8. Accordingly, the property came to be mutated in their favour by the revenue authorities competent to do so.

(3.) Mst. Zainab Begum-appellant, on acquiring knowledge of the said clandestine sale, sought permission of the Civil Court to amend the suit enabling her to challenge the subsequent sale deed, dated 20.7.1991. She also apprehended that the respondents would execute another sale deed in respect of the property in question. Accordingly, she filed an application to restrain the respondents from alienating the suit property or to change its character. On 22.7.1993, the aforementioned application was allowed and the learned Civil Court had passed an order of status quo. The respondents preferred not to appear before the Trial Court, which resulted in ex parte proceedings against them. At one stage, an application for setting aside the ex parte proceedings was filed and granted by the Trial Court. The respondents again continued to abstain and the proceedings ex parte were continued.