Court No. - 59
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 9356 of 2018 Petitioner :- Sushil And Another Respondent :- Mishri Lal Counsel for Petitioner :- Girdhar Prasad Tripathi
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed for setting aside the order dated 21.3.2017 in Misc. Appeal No.148 of 2016 (Mishri Lal Vs. Sushil and another) passed by the Additional District Judge/FTC-I, Ballia and the order dated 25.10.2018 in Civil Misc. Case No.01 of 2017 (Sushil and another Vs. Mishri Lal) passed by the Additional District Judge/FTC-I, Ballia.
The plaintiff-petitioner has filed O.S. No.225 of 2015 for injunction with respect to the disputed land in which an interim order was passed. In the said suit an impleadment application under Order I Rule 10 C.P.C. was moved on behalf of the Gram Panchayat - Deoriya Kala and the State Government for impleadment as defendants for reason that the suit land is owned by Gram Panchayat but the Gram Panchayat has not been made party. In the said suit an ex party interim order dated 27.5.2015 was passed by the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.) East, Ballia. Against this order the defendant-appellant filed a Misc. Civil Appeal No.148 of 2016 which has been decided by the impugned order dated 21.3.2017 directing the concerned court below to decide the application 54 Ka within 15 days and thereafter decided the application 6Ga 2 on merit after hearing the parties. Against this order the plaintiff-appellant filed Civil Misc. Case No.01 of 2017 for recall of the order dated 21.3.2017. This application has been rejected by the impugned order dated 25.10.2018 on the finding that the order dated 21.3.2017 was passed after hearing the parties.
Perusal of the order dated 21.3.2017 shows that it was passed after hearing the parties, therefore, I do not find any manifest error of law in the impugned order dated 25.10.2018. By order dated 21.3.2017, a direction has been given by the appellate court to the trial court to decide the impleadment application 54 Ka within 15 days and thereafter decide the 6Ga 2 application.
The said order does not suffer from any legal infirmity inasmuch as the impleadment application filed for impleadment of the concerned Gram Panchayat and the State Government, contains clear averment that the disputed land belongs to Gram Panchayat and, therefore, which is necessary party. Under the circumstances, the direction issued by the appellate court for deciding the application 54 Ka within 15 days, does not suffer from any legal infirmity.
For the reasons aforestated, I do not find any merit in this petition. Therefore, the petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 20.12.2018/vkg