9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (2) TMI 315X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at sufficient cause was made out for recalling the order dated 25th September, 1979 passed in the proceedings under Section 9-A(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), 2. The facts of the case are in a very narrow compass. Before the Consolidation Officer the case was proceeded and an order was passed on 18th September, 1979 for proceeding ex-parte whereas the actual ex-parte final order against Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 was patsed on 25-9-1979 and on 6th October, 1979, the 12th day from 25-9-1979 Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 filed an application purporting to be under Section 201 of U.P. Land Revenue Act for setting aside the ex-parte order. 3. The Petitioner raised an objection that the applic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was no error apparent on the face of the record. 7. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Section 41 of the Act provides that the provisions of Chapters 9 and 10 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act shall apply to all proceedings including the appeal. The facts of the case are not disputed that in the proceedings before the Consolidation Officer on 13th September, 1979 an order was passed that the case may proceed ex-parte against Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 whereas on 25-9-79 the case was decided against Respondent Nos. 3 and 4. The restoration application was filed on 6th October, 1979 which was within fifteen days. In order to ascertain the controversy it is necessary to set out the statutory provisions of Sections 200 and 201 of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the U.P. Land Revenue Act the provision is that the Court may dismiss the case either in default or may bear and determine it ex-parte and there is no provision under Section 200 or 201 that the Court may pass an order to proceed ex-parte as is the provisions under Order 9 Rule 7 and Order 17 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. But the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure are not applicable to the provisions of the Act as Section 41 makes only Chapter 9 and Chapter 10 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act to be applicable and Section 53-B makes the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act applicable to the proceedings under the Act. Hence no order could have been passed by the Consolidation Officer to proceed ex-parte against Responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... must be one obtained in that action. 13. According to Wharton's Law Lexicon, the word 'judgment' means as under: judicial determination, decision of a Court. Judgment is also used to denote the reasons given by the Court for its decision. 14. According to Law Lexicon of British India, the word 'judgment' means as follows: the sentence of law or decision pronounced by a Court upon the matter contained in the record. All judgment is a final determination of the rights of the parties in an action. 15. In this way it is clear that on 13-9-79 just the order was passed to proceed ex-parte, hence nothing was done finally to compare the facts of either party so as to elicit truth and accordingly no judg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tter decision in State of Punjab v. Mst. Qatsar Jahan Begum AIR 1963 SC 1605 wherein it has filose been held that if the rights of a person are affected by an order and the limitation is prescribed for the; enforcement of the remedy, the said order must, have been either actually or constructively communicated to the party concerned. In the instant case there was no evidence nor even bald allegation in the petition as to on which date the said order was communicated to Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 as there was no provision in the Act to make an order to proceed ex- parte and the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure do not apply to the Act, hence the Consolidation officer has got only alternatives either to dismiss the case in default in cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to an end...to ascertain definitely, to bring to a conclusion, to settle by judicial sentence, to decide . It is accordingly clear that unless the case is finally decided, it cannot be said that the Consolidation Officer has determined the case or the controversy involved therein. It is thus clear that the Consolidation Officer has passed the judgment only on 25-9-79 and from that date within fifteen days restoration application was filed. Hence it was well within time. 22. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner has, however urged that no sufficient ground was made out for allowing the restoration application. But the Consolidation Officer has allowed the restoration application holding that the sufficient cause was made out and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
