Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 2702 (ALL)

Ram Niwas v. State of U. P.

2016-08-04

RAM SURAT RAM (MAURYA)

body2016
JUDGMENT Ram Surat Ram (Maurya),J. Heard Sri L. M. Tripathi for the petitioner and Sri Rajesh Yadav for the respondents. The writ petition has been filed against the order of Sub Divisional Officer dated 24.5.2000, Additional Commissioner dated 30.4.2001 and Board of Revenue, UP dated 4.2.2016. By the impugned order, the Sub Divisional Officer found that the suit was decreed exparte without there being any personal service upon Balwant, respondent-6 as such the exparte decree was set aside and suit was restored to its original number. The revision as well as second revision filed by the petitioner against the aforesaid order have been dismissed. The counsel for the petitioner submits that Sub Divisional Officer has allowed the application for setting aside the exparte decree without condoning the delay as such the order of Sub Divisional Officer was illegal but the revision has been wrongly dismissed. I have considered the arguments of the counsel for the petitioner. Under Article 123 of the Limitation Act, 1963, 30 days limitation has been provided for filing the application for setting side the exparte decree. Where the summons are personally served , the limitation will run from the date of decree and where the summons are not personally served the limitation will run from the date of knowledge of the exparte decree. In the present case the summons are not duly served therefore the limitation will run from the date of knowledge of the exparte decree. The application for setting aside the exparte decree was filed within time from the date of knowledge of the exparte decree as such there is no need of condonation of delay. Otherwise also the exparte decree has been recalled and the petitioner has liberty to agitate his grievance before the Sub Divisional Officer. No interference is required by this Court. However, it is alleged that the record of the case of Sub Divisional Officer is lying before Board of Revenue. The Office of Board of Revenue shall immediately remit the record to Sub Divisional Officer so that the case may be proceeded. With the aforesaid observation, writ petition is disposed of.