SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(UK) 225

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
SHARAD KUMAR SHARMA, J.
Ram Babu Meharotra and others - Appellants
Versus
Harnam Singh and others - Respondents
MCC No. 11840 of 2021 In Second Appeal No. 1565 of 2001 (Old No. 1670 of 1975)
Decided on : 04-04-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. D.S. Patni, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Himanshu Yadav, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Shubhang Dobhal, Advocate

The court's decision was influenced by the non-compliance with orders, the age of the case, and the lack of merit in the Second Appeal.

Headnote:

ORDER : Second Appeal - Recovery of Money - Order 21 Rule 66, Section 73 of the CPC, U.P. Reorganisation Act, 2000 - The court discussed the history of the case, including the auction sale, ex parte decree, restoration, and transfer of proceedings. The court also analyzed the implications of Section 35 of the U.P. Reorganisation Act, 2000, and the review application. The court ultimately found the Second Appeal to have no merit and dismissed it.

Fact of the Case:

The case involved a Suit filed in 1966 for the recovery of money by a bank. The property was auctioned, and subsequent legal proceedings ensued, including a review application and transfer of proceedings due to the U.P. Reorganisation Act, 2000. The Second Appeal was ultimately dismissed for want of prosecution and restoration application was also dismissed.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the Second Appeal had no merit and dismissed it due to non-compliance with orders and the age of the case.

Issues: The issues involved the history of the case, the implications of the U.P. Reorganisation Act, 2000, and the review application.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the non-compliance with orders, the age of the case, and the lack of merit in the Second Appeal.

Final Decision: The Second Appeal was dismissed due to non-compliance with orders and lack of merit.

ORDER :

Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

With the prior consent of the learned counsels for the parties as given on 17.03.2023, the Second Appeal has been placed today, though being public Holiday, they agreed to argue on merits of the Second Appeal.

2. Consequently, the Second Appeal has been notified to be listed on the orders of the Hon’ble The Chief Justice.

3. This Second Appeal carries a very chequered history. The precise chronological dates and events are given hereunder :-

i. In 1967, a Suit was filed for recovery of money, which was due to the plaintiff Bank, on a financial assistance which was extended to the defendants to the Suit.

ii. On 21st May, 1966, the Suit No.17 of 1966, Nainital Bank Ltd. Vs. Ram Babu Mehrotra, stood instituted before the Court of Addl. Civil Judge, Nainital.

iii. On 9th June, 1966, the aforesaid Suit for recovery of money was decreed.

iv. On 17th April, 1973, the Execution Case No. 19 of 1967, was registered before the Court of Addl. Civil Judge, Nainital, for executing the decree of 9th June, 1966.

v. Form IV-60 was issued in execution case under Order 21 Rule 66 in a reference to the proceedings under Section 73 of the CPC.

vi. A publication of the auction notice by the Government approved auctioneer was undertaken.

vii. On 19th September, 1968, the auction sale notice was published in a local newspaper by the Government Approved Auctioneer called as “Khabar Sagar”.

viii. Auction proclamation was made on 9th February, 1973, and auction was held on 10th July, 1973.

ix. On 31st July, 1974, a Misc. Civil Appeal No. 39 of 1973, was allowed ex parte, as against the decree of 9th June, 1966. Consequently, the sale dated 10.07.1973 was set aside by the Court of District Judge.

x. Being an ex parte decree, a restoration was filed under Order 41 Rule 21 of the CPC, to set aside the ex parte order dated 31st July, 1974, passed in Civil Appeal No.39 of 1973. xi. On 24th May, 1975, the ex parte decree dated 31st July, 1974 was set aside and the Misc. Civil Appeal No. 39 of 1973, was restored to its original number.

xii. Misc. Civil Appeal No. 39 of 1973, Harnam Singh Vs. Ram Babu Mehrotra, was decided on merits. The judgment of Addl. Civil Judge dated 9th May, 1973, was set aside and the sale deed of 10th March, 1973 was confirmed.

xiii. On 31st October, 1975, Justice M.P. Saxena, confirmed the sale and directed the dispossession of the appellants from the disputed property, to be handed over to the auction purchaser.

xiv. On 22nd July, 1980, on the basis of the confirmation of sale dated 10th March, 1973, Nagar Palika, Haldwani, ordered mutation of the name of auction purchaser Harnam Singh, and he was also assessed for payment of municipal taxes.

xv. On 6th July, 1987, the Misc. Second Appeal was preferred before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad and the same was dismissed thereby confirming the judgement of Executing Court.

xvi. On 5th February, 1988, a review was filed by the appellant, being Review No. 11 of 1987, which remained pending.

xvii. In 2003, the case was transferred from Allahabad High Court on the directions of the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of High Court of Judicature at Allahabad as per Section 35 of the Reorganization Act.

xviii. On transfer, on 28th April, 2006, notices were issued to the respondents and it was informed in the office report that appellant No.2, has died and the service on respondent Nos. 1/1 to 1/5 and respondent Nos. 1 and 2 was found sufficient.

xix. On 9th June, 2006, the Second Appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution by this High Court.

xx. After ten years, the Restoration Application No. 781 of 2016, was filed to recall the order dated 9th June, 2006.

xxi. On 14th May, 2018, the Coordinate Bench passed an order, that if the substitution is not filed within time i.e. two weeks as given, the Second Appeal would stand dismissed without reference to the Bench, as no substitution was filed because Harnam Singh had died in 1999 till the matter was taken up on 14th May, 2018.

xxii. On

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top