CLR/103/2023
2023 Latest Caselaw 1997 UK

             Office Notes, reports,
             orders or proceedings
SL.
      Date     or directions and                    COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
             Registrar's order with
                  Signatures
                                      CLR No. 103 of 2023
                                      Hon'ble Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.

Mr. Neeraj Garg, counsel for the revisionist.

2. Mr. Rajat Mittal, counsel for the respondent.

3. The revision has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 20.07.2022 passed by Judge, SCC/Addl. District Judge, Vikas

of 2021 whereby the suit for eviction, recovery of rent and mesne profit filed by plaintiff/respondent has been decreed and defendant/revisionist has been directed to hand over the peaceful possession of the suit property to the plaintiff/respondent.

4. Counsel for the revisionist would submit that the provision of Order 5 Rule 9(5) read with Section 17 of C.P.C. has not been complied as the service has not been held sufficient upon the defendant/revisionist, therefore, the order dated 20.07.2022 is misconceived as the same has been passed ex- parte; that, though the revisionist has not filed any application under Order 9 Rule 13 of C.P.C. read with Section 51 of C.P.C. for setting aside the ex-parte judgment passed by the lower court, however, he has taken this plea in this present revision only; that, the suit was instituted before the Court of Judge, Small Causes Court/District Court, Dehradun, thereafter, the case was transferred to the Court of Addl. District Judge, Dehradun vide order dated 25.08.2021. The notices were issued by the Judge, Small Causes Court, Dehradun on 24.09.2021.

5. Per contra, counsel for the respondent/plaintiff would submit that the notice was sent to the revisionist/defendant through registered post A.D., photocopy of which is annexed with the appeal (Page No.

60) clearly shows that the revisionist/defendant had refused to accept the same.

6. However, perusal of the notice which (annexed at Page No. 59) was sent through the ordinary process is confusing about the pendency of the case in the court. It states that court of Small Causes Court is generally the court of District Judge at Head Quarter.

7. Counsel for the respondent seeks and is granted two weeks time to file reply/objections to the delay condonation application (IA No. 01 of 2023) with advance copy to the counsel for the revisionist, rejoinder, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter with advance copy to the counsel for the respondent.

8. Admit the revision.

9. List this matter on 05.09.2023.

10. Till the next date of listing, the effect and operation of the impugned judgment dated 20.07.2022 and decree passed by learned Judge SCC/Additional District Judge, Vikas

of 2021 shall remain stayed.

(Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.) 01.08.2023 Akash