Court No. - 30
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2662 of 2019 Petitioner :- Praveen Kumar Kansal Respondent :- Dr. Ambuj Kamboj And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suresh Chandra,Alok Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- Pradeep Singh
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.
Heard Shri Alok Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Pradeep Singh, learned counsel for the respondent and learned Standing Counsel for the State.
This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to set aside the judgment and decree dated 24.12.2018 passed by District Judge, Meerut in Civil Revision No.68 of 2017 (Praveen vs. Dr.Ambuj Kamboj and another) and judgement and decree dated 6.5.2016 passed by Additional Civil Judge Senior Division, Court No.5, Meerut in Miscellaneous Case No.2 of 2014 (Dr.Ambuj Kamboj vs. Praveen Kansal) and further prayer is to stay the aforesaid orders.
By the impugned order dated 6.5.2016 an application filed by the respondent no.1 under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. for recalling the judgment dates 25.4.2014 and decree dated 30.4.2014 passed in O.S.No.69/14 was allowed and the same was recalled on the ground that earlier order was passed without impleading the applicant respondent no.1 who was defendant no.4 in O.S.No.1050 of 1990, Khusi Ram vs. Pradeep. Revision against the same filed by the petitioner was dismissed and interference in the order of the trial court was refused.
Submissions of counsel for the petitioner is that respondent no.1 is not a party in O.S.No.69/14 and the application filed is highly belated and as such the same could not have been allowed.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent no.1 submitted that the in O.S.No.69/14 the decree was obtained by playing fraud and was rightly recalled and that with regard to the same property, proceedings were decided against the petitioner upto this Court and therefore, the suit was got decreed by him by impleading third person who has no concern with the property by playing fraud, and therefore, no interference is required in the impugned order.
I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.
From a perusal of record, I find that the courts below have recorded the findings that the decree has been obtained by playing fraud without impleading the respondent no.1 in whose favour earlier proceedings were decided upto to this Court and as such, no interferences is required as no serious prejudice is caused to the petitioner and he still has opportunity to contest the case on merit.
In such view of the matter, I do not find any good ground to interfere in the impugned order.
Present petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 26.4.2019 Rk