The High Court dismissed the present civil revision petition as not maintainable. It held that since a co-ordinate bench had already heard and dismissed a challenge (Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 1160 of 2017) to the impugned order, the remedy under Article 227 was exhausted.
The civil revision petition was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL REVISION No.262 of 2016
======================================================
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Patna High Court C.R. No.262 of 2016 dt.17-10-2019 2/4
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashi Sekhar Dwivedi, Sr. Adv & Mr.Pravin Chandra Prasad, Adv For the Respondent/s : Mr.Abhay Kumar Singh, Adv & Mr. Siddharth Kumar Singh, Adv ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 17-10-2019
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
setting aside the order dated 30.08.2016 passed by District Judge, Begusarai, in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 3 of 2015, by which appeal preferred by opposite party against the judgment and order dated 31.05.2015 passed by Munsif, Bakhari, Begusarai, in Miscellaneous Case No. 13 of 2011 dismissing the application of opposite party for setting aside ex parte judgment and decree dated 29.04.2003 passed in Title Suit No. 57 of 1996 has been allowed.
Patna High Court C.R. No.262 of 2016 dt.17-10-2019 3/4
co-ordinate bench of this Court and dismissed on 24.07.2018, as such present civil revision petition against the same order is not maintainable. The judgment and order passed by a co-ordinate bench of this Court in Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 1160 of 2017 dismissing the civil miscellaneous case by order dated 24.07.2018, is reproduced here-in-below:-
“Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. The petitioners have filed this Civil Misc. petition against the order dated 30.08.2016 passed in Misc. Appeal No. 03 of 2015 by which the learned District Judge set aside the order of the learned Munsif passed in Misc. Case No. 13 of 2011 by which the learned Munsif dismissed the petition of the defendant for setting aside the ex parte judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No. 57 of 1996.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned District Judge without appreciating the facts that the notice was duly served on the defendant set aside the order passed in Misc. Case No. 13 of 2011 and restored the Title Suit No. 57 of 1996.
Having considered the submissions and on perusal of records I find that Title Suit No. 57 of 1996 was decided ex parte. The defendant filed Misc. Case No. 13 of 2011 for setting aside the ex parte judgment and decree. The defendant came to know about the ex parte judgment and decree only in the year 2011 when Execution case was filed. On perusal of the order of the learned District Judge, it appears that learned District Judge has considered all the facts and found that the defendant has no knowledge about the pendency of the suit and the judgment and decree passed ex parte and, accordingly, set aside the order of learned Munsif by which he dismissed the petition of the defendant for setting aside the ex parte judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No. 57 of 1996.
I do not find any illegality or jurisdictional error in the impugned order. Accordingly, this Civil Misc. petition is dismissed as devoid of any merit.”
Patna High Court C.R. No.262 of 2016 dt.17-10-2019
4/4
LCR of this case be returned to the court concerned
forthwith.
| ranjan/- | (S. Kumar, J) | |
|---|---|---|
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR | |
| CAV DATE | NA | |
| Uploading Date | 27.12.2019 | |
| Transmission Date | NA |
ranjan/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a civil revision petition is maintainable when a co-ordinate bench of the High Court has already dismissed a challenge to the same order in a Civil Miscellaneous Petition.
Whether the order upholding the impugned decision of the District Judge setting aside a Munsif's order has any merit warranting review.
Smt. Geeta Poddar @ Geeta Devi and Anr
Madan Mohan Singh and Ors
S. Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
