Krishan Kumar vs Circle Revenue Officer And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 10945 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Krishan Kumar vs Circle Revenue Officer And Another on 5 July, 2024

                                      Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:083562



S. No.271                                       2024:PHHC:083562
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH
                       ****
                                   CR No.2063 of 2024
                                    Date of Decision: 05.07.2024
Krishan Kumar                     .....Petitioner
      Vs.
Circle Revenue Officer and another .....Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

Present:-   Ms. Deepika, Advocate for Mr. S.K. Yadav,
            Advocate for the petitioner.

            Mr. Rajbir Singh, DAG, Haryana.
                        ****

DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (Oral)

Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 18.12.2023 passed by

learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mohindergarh, whereby an

application under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC to amend the

application filed under Section 144 CPC, was dismissed.

2. Learned counsel contends that an application for restitution

under Section 144 CPC (copy Annexure P.5) was moved by the petitioner

for compliance of the judgment dated 12.03.1982 (Annexure P.1), for setting

aside Mutation No.332 dated 06.07.1982. However, inadvertenly, the

mutation number in the heading and relevant paragraphs of the application

was mentioned to be 33 dated 06.07.1982 instead of 332 dated 06.07.1982.

The said application has been dismissed by the trial Court by way of the

impugned order by observing that in the initial petition, mutation number

was not mentioned.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention towards

the copy of the petition filed under Section 144 of CPC (Annexure P.3)

wherein in the headnote as well as para No.5 onwards, mutation number has

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:083562

CR No.2063 of 2024 2024:PHHC:083562

been mentioned to be 33 dated 06.07.1982. It is contended that the learned trial

Court has wrongly observed that no mutation number was mentioned.

4. Learned State Counsel has drawn attention towards the vernacular

copy of Annexure P.3, which would reveal that mutation number as 33 has been

inserted later on by Pen in the relevant paragraph, though initially the space for

mutation number had been left.

5. Heard. Be that as it may, it is not in dispute that petitioner sought

restitution under Section 144 CPC on the basis of the judgment dated 12.03.1982

(Annexure P.1) on which basis, a mutation has been sanctioned on 06.07.1982.

Even if it be assumed that mutation number was not mentioned, it has not been

disputed that mutation on the basis of the judgment dated 12.03.1982 is bearing

No.332 . The impugned order is not sustainable as the learned trial Court appears

to be swayed by the fact that mutation number had not been given. The Court was

required to peruse the entire application and the relevant documents, before

considering the application.

6. As such, the present petition is hereby accepted. The impugned order

dated 18.12.2023 is set aside. The application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for

making necessary correction regarding mutation number in the petition under

Section 144 CPC is hereby allowed. The trial Court is directed to proceed further

accordingly, in accordance with law.

July 05, 2024                                        ( DEEPAK GUPTA )
renu                                                      JUDGE
            Whether Speaking/reasoned           Yes/No
            Whether Reportable                  Yes/No




                               Page No.2 out of 2 pages


                                       2 of 2