JUDGMENT :

1. This writ petition was heard at length on Friday (3.5.2019) and after hearing the parties, the Court directed the case to be listed under the heading “For Orders” on 6.5.2019. The case was listed for orders and in open Court the order was dictated. At the time of rising of the Court, Mr. Syed Md.Iqbal Hasan Rahmani, learned counsel appearing for the respondents made a prayer that he was not heard before dictating the order. He admitted that the case was listed under the heading “For Orders” with note to be taken up at 10.30 AM but he could not mark the list properly and as such he could not attend the Court at the time of dictating the order. Under the aforesaid circumstances, the Court posted the case for orders on 7.5.2019 and Mr.Syed Md.Iqbal Hasan Rahmani was heard at length. After making oral submissions and replying the query of the Court, he submitted that he may be granted liberty to file ‘Written Notes of Argument’. Considering his request he was granted time till 8.5.2019 to file ‘Written Notes of Argument’. Mr. Rahmani has filed the ‘Written Notes of Argument’ enclosing the judgments in support of his case.

2. This writ petition was filed by the petitioner Most Nomina Khatoon, wife of Late Md. Ali Raja and 6 sons and daughters of Late Md. Ali Raja and Jamila Khatoon daughter of Md. Yasin for setting aside the order dated 3.4.2006 and the consequential award dated 3.4.2006 passed by the Mobile Lok Adalat, Muzaffarpur in Partition Suit No. 7 of 2006 vide Annexures 3 and 3/A and also for setting aside the order dated 6.7.2019 passed by the learned Munsif in Miscellaneous Case No. 2/2009 as well as the order dated 30.3.2010 passed by the District Judge, Muzaffarpur in Misc. Appeal No. 14/2009.

3. The brief facts, relevant for deciding the present writ petition, are set out below.

Partition Suit No. 7 of 2006 was filed by respondents in the Court of Munsif, East Muzaffarpur stating therein that Md. Yasin was the common ancestor of the parties who left behind two sons and one daughter, namely, Md. Babar Ali (respondent) late Md. Ali Raja (husband of petitioner no. 1 and father of petitioner nos. 1 to 7) and Jamila Khatoon petitioner no. 8.

The suit was filed for half share of the suit property being Plot No. 3044, Khata No. 585 situated at village Kanhauli, Bishun Dutt, P.S. Mithanpura, District-Muzaffarpur. The plaintiff claimed that Md. Yasin and his sons were members of joint family and Md. Yasin was karta and Karbari.

Before the suit could be admitted, a compromise petition alleged to have been signed by the parties to the partition suit was filed in the Court of Munsif, East Muzaffarpur. In the compromise petition it was claimed that the defendants (plaintiffs) have relinquished their share in favour of the plaintiff and voluntarily gifted the land to the respondent on 29.1.2006 i.e. before the date of filing partition suit. After the compromise petition was filed, the suit was admitted on 3.3.2006. The Sheristedar was thereafter directed to examine the compromise petition and submit report. The Sheristedar gave a report and on that basis the record was sent to Mobile Lok Adalat on 3.4.2006 for disposal. On 3.4.2006 the suit was disposed of on the basis of compromise as the Court noted that Sheristedar has reported that the compromise was in order and on that basis the award was passed.

It is the contention of the petitioners that signature of defendant No. 4 Md. Sazzad was not obtained on the compromise petition and the petitioners have no notice about the partition suit nor they have engaged any lawyer to identify the signature and thumb impression of petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 and 5 to 8 nor they have signed any compromise petition. Their claim is that the signaure of petitioner nos. 1 to 3 and 5 to 8 on compromise petition is forged and fabricated.

When the Execution Case No. 22/2008 was filed for execution of the award in partition suit, the executing Court issued notice to the judgment debtor (the petitioners