High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Shilpi & Others vs Gopal Krishan Sood & Others on 6 July, 2011

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Shilpi & Others vs Gopal Krishan Sood & Others on 6 July, 2011
C.M. No.236-CII of 2011 in C.R. No.378 of 2010
                                                                           -1-

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH


                               C.M. No.236-CII of 2011 in
                               C.R. No.378 of 2010
                               Date of Decision : 06.07.2011

Shilpi & others
                                                               .... Petitioners
                                   Versus
Gopal Krishan Sood & others
                                                             .... Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL.


Present:     Mr. Amit Jain, Advocate for the applicant-petitioners.

             Mr. S. S. Behl, Advocate for respondent No.1.

                                   ****
L.N.MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

This is application by petitioners for recall of order dated

19.03.2010 whereby Civil Revision filed by applicant-petitioners was

dismissed as withdrawn.

In order dated 17.01.2011 while issuing notice of motion, it was

observed that prima facie no ground for recall of order dated 19.03.2010

was made out, yet since the dispute is among descendants of common

ancestor, notice of the application be issued to explore possibility of

amicable settlement between the parties. However counsel for respondent

No.1 stated on 07.03.2011 that there was no chance of amicable settlement.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

case file.

It is alleged in the application that applicant-petitioners

withdrew the revision petition as respondent No.1 made it a pre-condition

for effecting final amicable settlement. However the revision petition was
C.M. No.236-CII of 2011 in C.R. No.378 of 2010
-2-

withdrawn stating that the parties had arrived at compromise. In fact no

compromise had been arrived at by that time. On the contrary, as per

averments in the instant application, suit file was put up before Lok Adalat,

Malerkotla on 22.05.2010 but compromise could not be arrived at between

the parties. However, inspite thereof, the instant application was filed on

05.01.2011 i.e. more than seven months after negotiation for compromise

had failed in the Lok Adalat.

Keeping in view all the circumstances, I find no ground for

recall of order dated 19.03.2010 whereby the revision petition has been

dismissed as withdrawn. Instant application is misconceived and meritless

and is accordingly dismissed.

( L. N. MITTAL )
JUDGE
06.07.2011
‘raj’
C.M. No.236-CII of 2011 in C.R. No.378 of 2010
-3-