Yoginder vs Kavita
2022 Latest Caselaw 6082 P&H

133
              IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
                         CHANDIGARH

                                             CR No.2390 of 2022
                                             Date of Decision: 04.07.2022

Yoginder
                                                              ......Petitioner
                                  Versus

Smt. Kavita

                                                              ......Respondent

BEFORE: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA

              *****

Present:-     Mr. Iqbal Singh Saggu, Advocate
              for the petitioner.

MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J.(Oral)

Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 09.08.2021 (Annexure

P-5) passed by learned Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, Sohna,

District Gurugram (for short 'the trial Court') as well as the judgment dated

09.05.2022 (Annexure P-7) handed down by learned District Judge,

Gurugram, the revisionist-petitioner (here-in-after to be referred as 'the

plaintiff') has preferred the present revision petition.

2. Bereft of unnecessary details, the facts culminating in the

filing of the instant revision petition, are that the plaintiff filed a civil suit

against the respondent (here-in-after to be referred as 'the defendant') for

seeking a decree for specific performance of the agreement to sell, as

claimed to have been executed in his favour in respect of the suit property.

Vide order Annexure P-3, the above-said civil suit was dismissed in

1 of 3

default. The plaintiff moved application Annexure P-4 for seeking

restoration of the said civil suit which has been dismissed by the trial Court

vide order Annexure P-5 and the appeal preferred against the afore-said

order has also ended in its dismissal vide judgment Annexure P-7.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the revisionist-petitioner

(plaintiff) in this revision petition and have also perused the file carefully.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner (plaintiff) contends that the

plaintiff could not pursue the said civil suit because he suffered depression

due to the death of his sister and father and therefore, the above-said civil

suit deserves to be restored and to be heard and decided on merits.

5. However, the afore-raised contention is devoid of any merit

because the said civil suit was dismissed in default on 06.10.2016 and

application Annexure P-4 was moved by the plaintiff on 02.07.2021, i.e

after about four years and nine months. Moreover, as specifically

mentioned in the impugned order Annexures P-5 and judgment Annexure

P-7, the sister of the plaintiff expired in May, 2018 and his father passed

away on 04.11.2018, i.e much after the dismissal of the above-said suit on

06.10.2016. To add to it, the petitioner has not placed any document on the

file to show that he suffered depression because of the said tragedies in his

family and remained under any treatment for the same. In these

circumstances, it is explicit that there was an inordinate delay on the part of

the plaintiff in filing application Annexure P-4 which has not been

plausibly explained by him. The said application was, thus, hopelessly time

barred and has rightly been dismissed.

2 of 3

6. As a sequel to the foregoing discussion, it follows that the

impugned order Annexure P-5 and judgment Annexure P-7, as passed by

both the Courts below, do not suffer from any illegality, irregularity,

infirmity or perversity so as to call for any interference by this Court.

7. Resultantly, the revision petition in hand, being sans any

merit, stands dismissed.

                                                (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA)
July 04, 2022                                         JUDGE
pooja



             Whether speaking/reasoned:               Yes

             Whether Reportable:                      No




                                   3 of 3