Surinder Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 19732 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Surinder Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 7 November, 2024

Author: G.S. Sandhawalia

Bench: G.S. Sandhawalia

                              Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:145523-DB




IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                  AT CHANDIGARH

(123)                                             LPA-2760-2024 (O&M)
                                                  Decided on : 07.11.2024

Surinder Singh                                               ......Appellant(s)
                                         Versus
State of Punjab & others                                     ......Respondent(s)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA
        HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

Present:     Mr.Rakesh Bhatia, Advocates for the appellant.

             Ms.Arundhati Kulshrestha, AAG, Punjab.

G.S. Sandhawalia, J.(Oral)

1. Consideration in the present appeal is to judgment dated

25.07.2024 passed in CWP-14452-2024.

2. Admittedly, challenge was raised to the judgment and decree

dated 05.06.2012 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana on the

basis that the judgment was gained by fraud. When the matter came up before

the Learned Single Judge, it transpired that an application was filed under

Order 9 Rule 13 CPC which had been dismissed. Resultantly, the Learned

Single Judge had relegated the present appellant to the alternate remedy, in

accordance with law on 01.07.2024.

3. Not satisfied with the same, thereafter, application bearing CM-

11228-CWP-2024 for recalling the said order was filed. Learned Single Judge

devoted 10 paragraphs and resultantly, order dated 01.07.2024 was recalled by

noting that the writ petition had been filed after more than 5 years when the

application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC was filed and resultantly, the writ

petition was dismissed on account of raising disputed questions of fact and

availability of alternative remedy.

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:145523-DB

(123) LPA-2760-2024 (O&M) -2-

4. The law is settled on this ground that once there is an alternate

remedy available, writ jurisdiction is not liable to be exercised. Even

otherwise, where there is issue of fraud, it is a disputed question of fact. The

appellant was never party to the said suit and therefore, we do not see any

tangible reason as to how the writ petition could have been entertained as it is

trite law that the Writ Court is not to go into the disputed questions of fact.

Resultantly, we are of the considered opinion that the Learned Single Judge

was well justified in relegating the appellant to his alternate remedy.

5. Accordingly, in view of the above discussion, finding no merit in

the present appeal, the same is hereby dismissed.

(G.S. SANDHAWALIA) JUDGE

(DEEPAK GUPTA) 07.11.2024 JUDGE sailesh

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether Reportable : No

2 of 2