Court No. - 30
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3871 of 2018 Petitioner :- Bashir Ahmad Khan And 4 Others Respondent :- Munawwar Ali Khan And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- In Person
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.
Heard Sri Bashir Ahmad Khand-petitioner appearing in person and perused the record.
Present petition has been filed for setting aside the order dated 28.11.2017 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 3, Shahjahanpur in Misc. Case No. 71 of 2017.
By the impugned order, the recall application for recalling the earlier order whereby Misc. case for restoring the Misc. Case filed for recall of the earlier order of dismissal of another Misc. Case whereby the recall application was dismissed, has been rejected.
Submission of petitioner appearing in person is that opportunity of hearing should be granted to the parties and on mere technicalities the application should not be dismissed. He further submits that the Court below should adopt liberal approach while considering the restoration/recall application.
I have considered the submissions of the petitioner appearing in person.
In the present case, the suit no. 361 of 1987 was decreed vide order dated 28.9.1997. The petitioner filed Civil Misc. Appeal No. 108 of 1998. The aforesaid appeal was dismissed in default on 19.7.2006. An application filed under Order 41 Rule 19 CPC was dismissed in default on 17.4.2010. Misc. Application for recall of the order dated 17.4.2010 was dismissed in default on 7.7.2012. The petitioner again moved an application under Section 51 CPC, which was also dismissed on 13.11.2014. Again a recall application dated 29.11.2014 was filed, which too was dismissed on 22.7.2016. The petitioner moved another recall application no. 65 of 2016 to recall the order dated 22.7.2016, which was dismissed vide order dated 12.5.2017. The petitioner did not stop here and again filed a recall application no. 71 of 2017 to recall the order dated 12.5.2017. The same was dismissed by the impugned order dated 28.11.2017.
Noticing all these facts, the impugned order was passed. Now the petitioner is challenging the aforesaid order before this Court by means of the present petition.
The Stamp Reporter has reported laches of 64 days in filing the present petition.
A perusal of record clearly indicates that one after another application for recall of the earlier orders were being filed, which were dismissed by the Court below. The petitioner no. 1, who is appearing in person, is admittedly an advocate and understands the implication of non- appearance. The suit was decree in the year 1998. The conduct of the petitioner clearly indicates that he had never been diligent in pursuing his case.
In such view of the matter, I do not find any legal infirmity or jurisdictional error in the order impugned herein.
Present petition is devoid of merit and accordingly dismissed.
Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned Court below by FAX within ten days.
No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 30.5.2018 Abhishek