C.R.No.213 of 2005 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.R.No.213 of 2005
Date of decision:09.03.2009.
Gurdwara Sahib through S.G.P.C. ...Petitioner
Versus
Teja Singh and others ...Respondents.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND.
Present: Mr. Paramjit Singh Thiara, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. S.S.Rangi, Advocate, for the respondents.
*****
S.D.ANAND, J. (ORAL)
The petitioner – S.G.P.C., Amritsar had not been initially
impleaded as a party in the suit. Defendant No.1 was described therein as
“Gurdwara Sahib Wakia Rakba Samrala Ba – ihtimam Intamzamia
Committee through Amarjit Singh S/o Kartar Singh, resident of Samrala”. It
is common ground that the Gurudwara aforementioned was taken over by
the S.G.P.C. w.e.f. 01.01.1987. It was thereafter only that the S.G.P.C.,
Amritsar filed a plea under Order 1 Rule 10 C.P.C. for being impleaded as
defendant No.1 in place of the initially impleaded defendant No.1. That
plea came to be allowed by the Court vide order dated 3.3.1987. It was
directed that defendant No.1 therein shall thereafter be read as under: –
“Gurudwara Sahib Wakia Rakba Samrala Ba-ihtimam S.G.P.C.,
Amritsar through its president”.
The matter, thereafter, came to be adjourned for 20.04.1987 for
effecting of service upon the newly added defendant No.1. The Presiding
Officer of the concerned Court had been transferred and the new
incumbent had not taken over charge by that time. The matter, thereafter,
came up on 27.04.1987 for effecting of service upon the newly added
defendant No.1. On the adjourned date i.e. 22.5.1987, the Court noticed
C.R.No.213 of 2005 2
that the notice to S.G.P.C. Amritsar could not be issued as the process fee
and RC had not been filed. On 23.7.1987, the learned Trial Court passed
the following order: –
“In this case, defendant S.G.P.C. Remains to be served. The
case is pending since 9.4.1983 and further proceedings are held
for want of service of S.G.P.C. I am satisfied that the said
defendant is not likely to be served through ordinary process. Let
the said defendant be served through publication in Daily Jagjot
on depositing publication fee for 14.8.1987”.
On the publication of a Court notice in the Daily Jagjot, ex-parte
proceedings came to be ordered against the petitioner – S.G.P.C.
I find force in the contention of the learned counsel for the
petitioner that sufficient cause for the effecting of substituted service upon
defendant No.1 had not been made out and the grant of that order was
invalid. In that view of things, the impugned order passed by the learned
Trial Court and also the Lower Appellate Court, declining the plea under
Order 9 Rule 13 CPC, deserves to be and is ordered to be invalidated by
allowance of this petition. The petitioner shall be entitled to join the
proceedings and file its pleadings. Thereafter, the learned Trial Court shall
proceed in accordance with law.
On consensual basis, the following order is passed : –
i) The pleadings on behalf of the petitioner – defendant shall be
filed before the learned Trial Court within one month from
today, with an advance copy to the plaintiffs – respondents
herein. The rejoinder, if any, shall be field within one week
thereof. After the filing of rejoinder, the issues shall be framed
by the learned Trial Court and the matter would be adjourned
for recording of plaintiffs’ – respondents’ evidence.
ii) On completion of the pleadings, both the parties shall be
C.R.No.213 of 2005 3
allowed to avail of two adjournments each for concluding their
respective evidence. If any official witnesses are to be
summoned, the parties applying therefor would obtain dasti
summonses. However, the non-execution thereof shall be no
excuse for the grant of an additional adjournment;
iii)The trial, in any case, shall be disposed of by the learned Trial
Court within three months from the date on which the petitioner
– defendant herein files the pleadings;
iv)The acknowledgment (of a copy of this order) issued by the
concerned Judicial Officer shall be forwarded to the Registry of
this Court. Learned District Judge shall himself maintain a tab
to ensure that the case is disposed of by aforementioned
period.
v) Both the parties, through their learned counsel, are directed to
appear before the learned Trial Court on 20.03.2009.
Disposed of accordingly.
March 09, 2009 (S.D.Anand) vinod Judge