ANITA SHARMA Vs. NANAGRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dtd. 28/7/2022 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge No.6, Jaipur Metropolitan-II, Jaipur in Restoration Application No.10/2022 (CIS No.83/2022), whereby the restoration application filed by the petitioner for restoration of application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC has been dismissed.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.1 filed a suit for possession, mesne profit and permanent injunction against the petitioner. That was decreed ex-parte on 30/10/2012. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that another suit against the petitioner and respondent No.1 was pending before Family Court in which respondent No.1 appeared on 5/3/2009 and 8/5/2009 and submitted that he is not in a good health and in relation to the disputed House No.D-9, Adarsh Basti, Tonk Road, Jaipur and he was not going to evict the petitioner from the property. That contention was recorded in the order-sheet of the Family Court proceedings.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that on account of said contention, petitioner could not attend the execution proceedings because she was under the impression that the said suit would be withdrawn by respondent No.1. She knew about the judgment dtd. 30/10/2012 in the year 2013. So, she filed an application before the trial court under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC on 18/2/2013 in which respondent No.1 filed reply. Respondent No.1 who is father of the petitioner was expired on 29/5/2018. Family members of the petitioner as well as respondent No.1 met the petitioner during the course of all the proceedings. So, she did not attend the proceedings pending under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC. That was dismissed on account of her non-appearance on 6/12/2018.