NAINITAL, India, Feb. 12 -- Uttarakhand High Court issued the following order on Jan. 6:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
Civil Revision No. 192 of 2023
Manorama Mathur - Revisionist
Versus
Raj Singh Chhetri Alias Indra Bahadur Chhetri and Another - Respondents
Present:
Ms. Gayatri Puri, Mr. Narender Yadav, and Mr. Jayant Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the revisionist/plaintiff.
Mr. Siddhartha Singh and Mr. Priyanshu Gairola, learned counsel for the respondent.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
The revisionist/plaintiff preferred a suit for eviction against the defendant in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.), Dehradun, which was dismissed ex parte on 06.11.2012, against which a civil appeal was preferred and the same was allowed. The ex parte judgment was set aside and the matter was remanded back on 08.03.2018.
Thereafter, the suit was decreed ex parte on 03.11.2018, against which the defendant filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13, which was allowed and the suit was restored. However, on 06.08.2019, when the defendant did not appear, the Trial Court proceeded ex parte against him and again the suit was decreed ex parte against the defendant on 28.08.2019.
Thereafter, the plaintiff filed Execution Case No. 16 of 2019 and subsequently filed a writ petition under Article 227, i.e., WPMS No. 1336 of 2021, for expediting the execution proceeding, which was disposed of finally on 15.07.2021 by directing the Executing Court to expedite the execution proceeding.
The rest of the order can viewed here:
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=tuqye3PhFs%2BBDn75ghiOpFN5iq1lGIJvS%2F8XSlg9L4syV1%2BYohB1ky8jxPM8CYfI&caseno=CLR/192/2023&cCode=1&cino=UKHC010209282023&state_code=15&appFlag=
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
