{"id":127570,"date":"2010-04-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-04-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010"},"modified":"2016-05-26T17:22:01","modified_gmt":"2016-05-26T11:52:01","slug":"smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010","title":{"rendered":"Smt. Sumitra Jain &amp; Others vs Sri Rajnish Kumar &amp; Others on 2 April, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Allahabad High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Smt. Sumitra Jain &amp; Others vs Sri Rajnish Kumar &amp; Others on 2 April, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>                                                                             Court\u00a0No.7\n\n\n\n\n                  Civil\u00a0Misc.\u00a0Writ\u00a0Petition\u00a0No.11806\u00a0of\u00a02007\n\n        Smt.\u00a0Sumitra\u00a0Jain\u00a0&amp;\u00a0others\u00a0vs.\u00a0Sri\u00a0Rajnish\u00a0Kumar\u00a0&amp;\u00a0others.\n\n\n                                        .............\n\n\nHon'ble\u00a0Devendra\u00a0Pratap\u00a0Singh,J.\n<\/pre>\n<p>1.     Respondent \u00a0 no.1\u00a0 is\u00a0 represented \u00a0 by\u00a0 Sri\u00a0 K.L.Grover \u00a0and \u00a0Sri \u00a0Ramesh\u00a0<br \/>\nSingh.\u00a0The\u00a0service\u00a0on\u00a0the\u00a0other\u00a0respondents\u00a0is\u00a0sufficient\u00a0as\u00a0is\u00a0evident\u00a0from\u00a0<br \/>\nthe \u00a0 affidavit \u00a0 filed \u00a0 on \u00a0 12th\u00a0 of \u00a0 February \u00a0 2009 \u00a0 but \u00a0 no \u00a0 one \u00a0 has \u00a0 entered\u00a0<br \/>\nappearance\u00a0on\u00a0their\u00a0behalf.\u00a0However,\u00a0their\u00a0interest\u00a0is\u00a0common\u00a0with\u00a0that\u00a0of\u00a0<br \/>\nrespondent\u00a0no.1\u00a0who\u00a0is\u00a0contesting\u00a0the\u00a0case.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.     Heard\u00a0learned\u00a0counsel\u00a0for\u00a0the\u00a0petitioner\u00a0and\u00a0Sri\u00a0Ramesh\u00a0Singh\u00a0for\u00a0<br \/>\nthe\u00a0respondents.\u00a0\n<\/p>\n<p>3.     This\u00a0petition\u00a0is\u00a0directed\u00a0against\u00a0an\u00a0order\u00a0dated\u00a023rd\u00a0of\u00a0January\u00a02007\u00a0<br \/>\npassed\u00a0in\u00a0a\u00a0revision\u00a0setting\u00a0aside\u00a0the\u00a0order\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0trial\u00a0court\u00a0dated\u00a026th\u00a0of\u00a0<br \/>\nAugust\u00a02006\u00a0rejecting\u00a0an\u00a0application\u00a0for\u00a0condonation\u00a0of\u00a0delay.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.     Brief\u00a0facts\u00a0are\u00a0that\u00a0the\u00a0landlord\u00a0petitioner\u00a0instituted\u00a0a\u00a0Small\u00a0Causes\u00a0<br \/>\nCourt\u00a0Suit\u00a0no.25\u00a0of\u00a01994\u00a0against\u00a0the\u00a0respondent\u00a0tenant\u00a0claiming\u00a0arrears\u00a0of\u00a0<br \/>\nrent \u00a0 and \u00a0 eviction. \u00a0 After \u00a0 filing \u00a0 \u00a0 written \u00a0 statement, \u00a0 the \u00a0 tenants \u00a0 absented\u00a0<br \/>\nthemselves\u00a0and\u00a0therefore\u00a0an\u00a0order\u00a0for\u00a0exparte\u00a0hearing\u00a0was\u00a0passed\u00a0on\u00a011th\u00a0of\u00a0<br \/>\nFebruary\u00a02003\u00a0whereafter\u00a0the\u00a0suit\u00a0was\u00a0decreed\u00a0on\u00a031st\u00a0 August\u00a02003.\u00a0The\u00a0<br \/>\nlandlord\u00a0put\u00a0the\u00a0decree\u00a0in\u00a0execution\u00a0through\u00a0execution\u00a0case\u00a0no.27\u00a0of\u00a02004\u00a0<br \/>\nwhere\u00a0registered\u00a0notices\u00a0were\u00a0served\u00a0on\u00a0the\u00a0respondents\u00a0in\u00a0January\u00a02005\u00a0<br \/>\nwhereafter \u00a0 an \u00a0 application \u00a0 under \u00a0 Order \u00a0 9 \u00a0 Rule \u00a0 13 \u00a0 C.P.C. \u00a0 alongwith \u00a0 an\u00a0<br \/>\napplication\u00a0for\u00a0condonation\u00a0of\u00a0delay\u00a0was\u00a0filed\u00a0\u00a0on\u00a019th\u00a0January\u00a02006.\u00a0After\u00a0<br \/>\ncontest\u00a0the\u00a0Court\u00a0refused\u00a0to\u00a0condone\u00a0the\u00a0delay\u00a0vide\u00a0order\u00a0dated\u00a026.8.2006\u00a0<br \/>\nwhich\u00a0was\u00a0subjected\u00a0to\u00a0challenge\u00a0in\u00a0revision\u00a0which\u00a0has\u00a0been\u00a0allowed\u00a0by\u00a0the\u00a0<br \/>\nimpugned\u00a0order\u00a0and\u00a0the\u00a0issue\u00a0on\u00a0condonation\u00a0of\u00a0delay\u00a0has\u00a0been\u00a0remanded\u00a0<br \/>\nfor\u00a0reconsideration.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.     It\u00a0is\u00a0urged\u00a0on\u00a0behalf\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0petitioner\u00a0that\u00a0the\u00a0revisional\u00a0court\u00a0erred\u00a0<br \/>\nin\u00a0allowing\u00a0the\u00a0revision\u00a0on\u00a0the\u00a0facts\u00a0of\u00a0this\u00a0case\u00a0without\u00a0even\u00a0setting\u00a0aside\u00a0<br \/>\nthe\u00a0findings\u00a0recorded\u00a0so\u00a0far\u00a0as\u00a0the\u00a0service\u00a0of\u00a0summons\u00a0in\u00a0the\u00a0execution\u00a0case\u00a0<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                                            2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>are\u00a0concerned.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.     It\u00a0is\u00a0no\u00a0doubt\u00a0true\u00a0that\u00a0the\u00a0Courts\u00a0generally\u00a0lean\u00a0in\u00a0favour\u00a0of\u00a0giving\u00a0<br \/>\nhearing\u00a0to\u00a0the\u00a0parties\u00a0and\u00a0liberal\u00a0in\u00a0condoning\u00a0delay,\u00a0\u00a0but\u00a0it\u00a0is\u00a0also\u00a0correct\u00a0<br \/>\nthat\u00a0there\u00a0should\u00a0be\u00a0some\u00a0reasonable\u00a0ground\u00a0and\u00a0truthfulness\u00a0in\u00a0support\u00a0of\u00a0<br \/>\na\u00a0plea\u00a0for\u00a0recall\u00a0of\u00a0an\u00a0exparte\u00a0order\u00a0or\u00a0for\u00a0condoning\u00a0the\u00a0delay.\u00a0Invariably\u00a0<br \/>\nthe\u00a0background\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0case\u00a0offers\u00a0a\u00a0good\u00a0barometer\u00a0in\u00a0such\u00a0cases.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.     The\u00a0eviction\u00a0suit\u00a0was\u00a0filed\u00a0on\u00a04th\u00a0of\u00a0March\u00a01994\u00a0with\u00a0the\u00a0allegation\u00a0<br \/>\nthat\u00a0the\u00a0tenants\u00a0were\u00a0in\u00a0arrears\u00a0of\u00a0rent\u00a0from\u00a0Ist\u00a0of\u00a0March\u00a01987.\u00a0After\u00a0filing\u00a0<br \/>\nof\u00a0the\u00a0written\u00a0statement,\u00a0the\u00a0tenants\u00a0firstly\u00a0absented\u00a0themselves\u00a0leading\u00a0to\u00a0<br \/>\nthe\u00a0passing\u00a0of\u00a0an\u00a0order\u00a0of\u00a0exparte\u00a0hearing\u00a0on\u00a0Ist\u00a0of\u00a0March\u00a02001\u00a0but\u00a0the\u00a0<br \/>\napplication\u00a0for\u00a0recall\u00a0was\u00a0made\u00a0after\u00a0about\u00a011\u00a0months\u00a0and\u00a0the\u00a0order\u00a0was\u00a0<br \/>\nrecalled \u00a0 on \u00a0 11th\u00a0 of \u00a0 April \u00a0 2002. \u00a0 But \u00a0 yet \u00a0 again, \u00a0 subsequently, \u00a0 the \u00a0 tenants\u00a0<br \/>\nabsented \u00a0 on \u00a0 four \u00a0 consecutive \u00a0 dates \u00a0 leading \u00a0 to \u00a0 the \u00a0 passing \u00a0 \u00a0 of \u00a0 another\u00a0<br \/>\nexparte\u00a0order\u00a0on\u00a011th\u00a0 of\u00a0February\u00a02003\u00a0and\u00a0the\u00a0exparte\u00a0decree\u00a0on\u00a031st\u00a0 of\u00a0<br \/>\nMarch \u00a0 2003. \u00a0 It \u00a0 appears \u00a0 that \u00a0 either \u00a0 the \u00a0 tenants \u00a0 were \u00a0 oblivious \u00a0 of \u00a0 the\u00a0<br \/>\nmessage\u00a0that\u00a0an\u00a0old\u00a0proverb\u00a0&#8220;once\u00a0bitten\u00a0twice\u00a0shy&#8221;\u00a0conveys\u00a0or\u00a0in\u00a0fact\u00a0their\u00a0<br \/>\ndisappearance\u00a0from\u00a0the\u00a0proceedings\u00a0was\u00a0justified\u00a0and\u00a0grounds\u00a0given\u00a0were\u00a0<br \/>\ntruthful.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.     The\u00a0Court,\u00a0to\u00a0verify\u00a0the\u00a0truthfulness\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0grounds\u00a0for\u00a0absence\u00a0is\u00a0<br \/>\npurposely\u00a0ignoring\u00a0plea\u00a0of\u00a0wife&#8217;s\u00a0illness,\u00a0death\u00a0of\u00a0son\u00a0and\u00a0the\u00a0misleading\u00a0<br \/>\nattitude\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0brother,\u00a0but\u00a0presently\u00a0is\u00a0confining\u00a0itself\u00a0only\u00a0to\u00a0the\u00a0facts\u00a0<br \/>\nwhich\u00a0stand\u00a0proved\u00a0on\u00a0the\u00a0record.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.     In\u00a0the\u00a0recall\u00a0and\u00a0condonation\u00a0applications,\u00a0the\u00a0tenants\u00a0have\u00a0stated\u00a0<br \/>\nthat\u00a0they\u00a0came\u00a0to\u00a0know\u00a0about\u00a0the\u00a0exparte\u00a0decree\u00a0and\u00a0execution\u00a0on\u00a018th\u00a0of\u00a0<br \/>\nJanuary \u00a0 2006 \u00a0 and \u00a0 immediately \u00a0 on \u00a0 the \u00a0 next \u00a0 date \u00a0 they \u00a0 filed \u00a0 the \u00a0 two\u00a0<br \/>\napplications.\u00a0The\u00a0petitioner\u00a0in\u00a0his\u00a0objection\u00a0denied\u00a0it\u00a0and\u00a0added\u00a0that\u00a0the\u00a0<br \/>\nregistered \u00a0 summons \u00a0 in \u00a0the \u00a0 execution \u00a0 case \u00a0 was \u00a0served \u00a0on \u00a0the \u00a0tenants \u00a0 in\u00a0<br \/>\nJanuary \u00a0 2005. \u00a0 The \u00a0 trial \u00a0 court, \u00a0 which \u00a0 also \u00a0 happens \u00a0 to \u00a0 be \u00a0 the \u00a0 executing\u00a0<br \/>\ncourt,\u00a0after\u00a0examining\u00a0the\u00a0records\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0execution\u00a0case,\u00a0found\u00a0as\u00a0a\u00a0matter\u00a0<br \/>\nof\u00a0fact\u00a0that\u00a0the\u00a0notices\u00a0in\u00a0the\u00a0execution\u00a0case\u00a0were\u00a0duly\u00a0served\u00a0upon\u00a0them\u00a0in\u00a0<br \/>\nJanuary \u00a0 2005. \u00a0 Neither \u00a0 in \u00a0 the \u00a0 two \u00a0 applications \u00a0 nor \u00a0 in \u00a0 the \u00a0 grounds \u00a0 of\u00a0<br \/>\nrevision\u00a0or\u00a0even\u00a0\u00a0in\u00a0the\u00a0counter\u00a0affidavit\u00a0filed\u00a0before\u00a0this\u00a0Court,\u00a0the\u00a0tenants\u00a0<br \/>\nhave \u00a0 disclosed \u00a0 the \u00a0 source \u00a0 of \u00a0 knowledge \u00a0 about \u00a0 the \u00a0 exparte \u00a0 decree \u00a0 or\u00a0<br \/>\nexecution\u00a0proceedings.\u00a0There\u00a0is\u00a0not\u00a0even\u00a0a\u00a0wishper\u00a0how\u00a0they\u00a0came\u00a0to\u00a0know\u00a0<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                                           3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>about\u00a0it\u00a0on\u00a018th\u00a0 of\u00a0January\u00a02006.\u00a0In\u00a0fact\u00a0they\u00a0did\u00a0not\u00a0even\u00a0challenge\u00a0the\u00a0<br \/>\nfindings\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0trial\u00a0court\u00a0on\u00a0this\u00a0aspect\u00a0in\u00a0the\u00a0grounds\u00a0of\u00a0revision.\u00a0These\u00a0<br \/>\nfacts\u00a0which\u00a0are\u00a0proven\u00a0on\u00a0the\u00a0record\u00a0totally\u00a0blast\u00a0their\u00a0truthfulness.\u00a0Should\u00a0<br \/>\nthe\u00a0Court\u00a0lean\u00a0in\u00a0their\u00a0favour?\n<\/p>\n<p>10.      More\u00a0than\u00a026\u00a0years\u00a0have\u00a0expired\u00a0since\u00a0the\u00a0filing\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0suit,\u00a0should\u00a0<br \/>\nthe\u00a0Court\u00a0force\u00a0the\u00a0plaintiffs\u00a0to\u00a0wait\u00a0for\u00a0eternity\u00a0or\u00a0till\u00a0his\u00a0death\u00a0so\u00a0that\u00a0a\u00a0<br \/>\nrecalcitrant\u00a0tenant\u00a0has\u00a0an\u00a0opportunity\u00a0which\u00a0he\u00a0himself\u00a0floundered\u00a0?\u00a0Sense\u00a0<br \/>\nof\u00a0justice\u00a0says,\u00a0yes,\u00a0but\u00a0only\u00a0when\u00a0he\u00a0is\u00a0truthfull,\u00a0because\u00a0justice\u00a0invariably\u00a0<br \/>\nhas\u00a0to\u00a0be\u00a0 \u00a0even\u00a0handed.\u00a0It\u00a0has\u00a0to\u00a0lean\u00a0against\u00a0falsehood\u00a0and\u00a0in\u00a0favour\u00a0of\u00a0<br \/>\ntruth.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.      It\u00a0is\u00a0obvious\u00a0that\u00a0the\u00a0averment\u00a0that\u00a0they\u00a0came\u00a0to\u00a0know\u00a0about\u00a0the\u00a0<br \/>\nexparte\u00a0decree\u00a0and\u00a0the\u00a0filing\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0execution\u00a0case\u00a0on\u00a018.1.2006\u00a0is\u00a0based\u00a0on\u00a0<br \/>\nfalsehood.\u00a0Justice\u00a0to\u00a0be\u00a0even\u00a0handed\u00a0will\u00a0have\u00a0to\u00a0lean\u00a0against\u00a0it.\u00a0\n<\/p>\n<p>12.      Let\u00a0us\u00a0now\u00a0examine\u00a0the\u00a0judgment\u00a0of\u00a0remand.\n<\/p>\n<p>13.      The\u00a0revisional\u00a0court\u00a0has\u00a0not\u00a0set\u00a0aside\u00a0the\u00a0finding\u00a0that\u00a0the\u00a0execution\u00a0<br \/>\nnotices\u00a0were\u00a0served\u00a0on\u00a0the\u00a0tenants\u00a0but\u00a0only\u00a0on\u00a0the\u00a0ground\u00a0that\u00a0there\u00a0was\u00a0a\u00a0<br \/>\nbald\u00a0denial\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0tenant,\u00a0it\u00a0has\u00a0remanded\u00a0the\u00a0issue\u00a0with\u00a0the\u00a0comment\u00a0that\u00a0<br \/>\nit\u00a0was\u00a0subject\u00a0to\u00a0evidence\u00a0I\u00a0Firstly,\u00a0all\u00a0the\u00a0evidence\u00a0was\u00a0there\u00a0on\u00a0the\u00a0record.\u00a0<br \/>\nSecondly, \u00a0 the \u00a0 tenants \u00a0 did \u00a0 not \u00a0 challenge \u00a0 this \u00a0 finding \u00a0 in \u00a0 the \u00a0 grounds \u00a0 of\u00a0<br \/>\nrevision \u00a0 nor \u00a0 they \u00a0 set \u00a0 up \u00a0 any \u00a0 plea \u00a0 that \u00a0 the \u00a0 address \u00a0 \u00a0 was \u00a0 wrong, \u00a0 the\u00a0<br \/>\nendorsement\u00a0was\u00a0false\u00a0etc.\u00a0etc.\u00a0Even\u00a0before\u00a0this\u00a0Court,\u00a0there\u00a0is\u00a0only\u00a0a\u00a0bald\u00a0<br \/>\ndenial.\u00a0At\u00a0the\u00a0cost\u00a0of\u00a0repetition,\u00a0it\u00a0may\u00a0be\u00a0reiterated\u00a0that\u00a0throughout\u00a0the\u00a0<br \/>\ncase\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0petitioner\u00a0landlords\u00a0was\u00a0that\u00a0the\u00a0tenants\u00a0were\u00a0duly\u00a0served\u00a0with\u00a0<br \/>\nregistered\u00a0AD\u00a0notices\u00a0in\u00a0the\u00a0execution\u00a0case\u00a0and\u00a0so\u00a0also\u00a0is\u00a0the\u00a0case\u00a0in\u00a0the\u00a0<br \/>\npresent\u00a0writ\u00a0petition.\u00a0It\u00a0is\u00a0stated\u00a0in\u00a0paragraph\u00a021\u00a0that\u00a0both\u00a0the\u00a0respondent\u00a0<br \/>\nnos.\u00a01\u00a0and\u00a02\u00a0were\u00a0duly\u00a0served\u00a0and\u00a0the\u00a0postal\u00a0receipts\u00a0were\u00a0also\u00a0filed,\u00a0the\u00a0<br \/>\nparagraph\u00a0runs\u00a0as\u00a0under\u00a0:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>                 &#8220;That \u00a0the\u00a0trial \u00a0court\u00a0also \u00a0recorded\u00a0the\u00a0findings \u00a0that \u00a0both\u00a0the \u00a0<br \/>\n         applicants\u00a0had\u00a0knowledge\u00a0in\u00a0as\u00a0much\u00a0as\u00a0both\u00a0of\u00a0them\u00a0were\u00a0duly\u00a0served \u00a0<br \/>\n         in \u00a0 execution \u00a0 case \u00a0 no.27\/2004 \u00a0 in \u00a0 the \u00a0 month \u00a0 of \u00a0 January \u00a0 2005. \u00a0 The \u00a0<br \/>\n         photostat\u00a0copy\u00a0of\u00a0postal\u00a0receipts\u00a0served\u00a0upon\u00a0the\u00a0respondent\u00a0no.1\u00a0and\u00a02 \u00a0<br \/>\n         are \u00a0 being \u00a0 filed \u00a0 herewith \u00a0 and \u00a0 marked \u00a0 as \u00a0Annexure \u00a0 7 \u00a0to \u00a0 this \u00a0 writ \u00a0<br \/>\n         petition.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>14.      The\u00a0respondents\u00a0in\u00a0their\u00a0reply\u00a0have\u00a0conveniently\u00a0been\u00a0vague\u00a0as\u00a0they\u00a0<br \/>\nhave \u00a0 been \u00a0 throughout \u00a0 the \u00a0 proceedings. \u00a0 They \u00a0 have \u00a0 replied \u00a0 to \u00a0 the \u00a0 said\u00a0<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                                                 4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>paragraph\u00a0in\u00a0the\u00a0following\u00a0paragraph\u00a019\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0counter\u00a0affidavit\u00a0filed\u00a0in\u00a0<br \/>\nthis\u00a0Court\u00a0:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>               &#8220;That \u00a0 in \u00a0 reply \u00a0 to \u00a0 the \u00a0 contents \u00a0 of \u00a0 paragraph \u00a0 21 \u00a0 of \u00a0 the \u00a0 writ \u00a0<br \/>\n        petition\u00a0it\u00a0is\u00a0submitted\u00a0that\u00a0the\u00a0findings\u00a0recorded\u00a0by\u00a0the\u00a0trial\u00a0court\u00a0are \u00a0<br \/>\n        perverse \u00a0 and \u00a0 against \u00a0 the \u00a0 material \u00a0 on \u00a0 record. \u00a0 It \u00a0 is \u00a0 also \u00a0 denied \u00a0 that \u00a0<br \/>\n        respondents \u00a0 had \u00a0 knowledge \u00a0 and \u00a0 they \u00a0 were \u00a0 duly \u00a0 served \u00a0 in \u00a0 execution \u00a0<br \/>\n        case.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>15.    The\u00a0Court\u00a0after\u00a0commenting\u00a0upon\u00a0the\u00a0fact\u00a0that\u00a0so\u00a0far\u00a0as\u00a0service\u00a0in\u00a0the\u00a0<br \/>\nexecution\u00a0case\u00a0is\u00a0concerned,\u00a0that\u00a0could\u00a0be\u00a0decided\u00a0on\u00a0the\u00a0basis\u00a0of\u00a0evidence\u00a0<br \/>\nbut\u00a0it\u00a0goes\u00a0on\u00a0to\u00a0hold\u00a0that\u00a0so\u00a0far\u00a0as\u00a0illness\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0wife\u00a0and\u00a0son&#8217;s\u00a0death\u00a0is\u00a0<br \/>\nconcerned, \u00a0 it \u00a0 is \u00a0 proved \u00a0 from \u00a0 the \u00a0 record \u00a0 and \u00a0 therefore \u00a0 he \u00a0 allowed \u00a0 the\u00a0<br \/>\nrevision \u00a0 on \u00a0 the \u00a0 ground \u00a0 that \u00a0 the \u00a0 trial \u00a0 court \u00a0 has \u00a0 not \u00a0 considered \u00a0 the\u00a0<br \/>\ndocumentary \u00a0 evidence \u00a0 on \u00a0 record \u00a0 while \u00a0 passing \u00a0 the \u00a0 order. \u00a0 However,\u00a0<br \/>\nnothing\u00a0has\u00a0been\u00a0disclosed\u00a0in\u00a0the\u00a0two\u00a0applications\u00a0about\u00a0the\u00a0nature\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0<br \/>\nillness\u00a0of\u00a0his\u00a0wife\u00a0or\u00a0the\u00a0exact\u00a0period\u00a0when\u00a0she\u00a0was\u00a0so\u00a0ill\u00a0that\u00a0he\u00a0could\u00a0not\u00a0<br \/>\nprosecute\u00a0his\u00a0case\u00a0before\u00a0the\u00a0Court.\u00a0Further,\u00a0admittedly\u00a0the\u00a0son\u00a0died\u00a0only\u00a0<br \/>\nafter\u00a0the\u00a0exparte\u00a0decree\u00a0but\u00a0again\u00a0the\u00a0cause\u00a0and\u00a0nature\u00a0of\u00a0his\u00a0death\u00a0and\u00a0the\u00a0<br \/>\nexact \u00a0 date \u00a0 of \u00a0 his \u00a0 death \u00a0 was \u00a0 never \u00a0 disclosed \u00a0 nor \u00a0 it \u00a0 is \u00a0 mentioned \u00a0 in \u00a0 the\u00a0<br \/>\nrevisional\u00a0order\u00a0and\u00a0in\u00a0the\u00a0two\u00a0applications.\u00a0\n<\/p>\n<p>16.    For\u00a0the\u00a0reasons\u00a0above,\u00a0this\u00a0petition\u00a0succeeds\u00a0and\u00a0is\u00a0allowed\u00a0and\u00a0the\u00a0<br \/>\norder \u00a0 dated \u00a0 23.1.2007 \u00a0 is \u00a0 quashed \u00a0 and \u00a0 the \u00a0 order \u00a0 of \u00a0 the \u00a0 trial \u00a0 court \u00a0 is\u00a0<br \/>\nrestored.\n<\/p>\n<p>17.    In\u00a0the\u00a0circumstances\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0case,\u00a0no\u00a0order\u00a0as\u00a0to\u00a0cost.\n<\/p>\n<p>Dated:\u00a002.4.2010.\n<\/p>\n<p>PKG\/\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Allahabad High Court Smt. Sumitra Jain &amp; Others vs Sri Rajnish Kumar &amp; Others on 2 April, 2010 Court\u00a0No.7 Civil\u00a0Misc.\u00a0Writ\u00a0Petition\u00a0No.11806\u00a0of\u00a02007 Smt.\u00a0Sumitra\u00a0Jain\u00a0&amp;\u00a0others\u00a0vs.\u00a0Sri\u00a0Rajnish\u00a0Kumar\u00a0&amp;\u00a0others. &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;. Hon&#8217;ble\u00a0Devendra\u00a0Pratap\u00a0Singh,J. 1. Respondent \u00a0 no.1\u00a0 is\u00a0 represented \u00a0 by\u00a0 Sri\u00a0 K.L.Grover \u00a0and \u00a0Sri \u00a0Ramesh\u00a0 Singh.\u00a0The\u00a0service\u00a0on\u00a0the\u00a0other\u00a0respondents\u00a0is\u00a0sufficient\u00a0as\u00a0is\u00a0evident\u00a0from\u00a0 the \u00a0 affidavit \u00a0 filed \u00a0 on \u00a0 12th\u00a0 of \u00a0 February \u00a0 2009 \u00a0 but \u00a0 no [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[9,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-127570","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allahabad-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Smt. Sumitra Jain &amp; Others vs Sri Rajnish Kumar &amp; Others on 2 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Smt. Sumitra Jain &amp; Others vs Sri Rajnish Kumar &amp; Others on 2 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-04-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-26T11:52:01+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Smt. Sumitra Jain &amp; Others vs Sri Rajnish Kumar &amp; Others on 2 April, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-26T11:52:01+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1359,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Allahabad High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010\",\"name\":\"Smt. Sumitra Jain &amp; Others vs Sri Rajnish Kumar &amp; Others on 2 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-26T11:52:01+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Smt. Sumitra Jain &amp; Others vs Sri Rajnish Kumar &amp; Others on 2 April, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Smt. Sumitra Jain &amp; Others vs Sri Rajnish Kumar &amp; Others on 2 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Smt. Sumitra Jain &amp; Others vs Sri Rajnish Kumar &amp; Others on 2 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-04-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-26T11:52:01+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Smt. Sumitra Jain &amp; Others vs Sri Rajnish Kumar &amp; Others on 2 April, 2010","datePublished":"2010-04-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-26T11:52:01+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010"},"wordCount":1359,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Allahabad High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010","name":"Smt. Sumitra Jain &amp; Others vs Sri Rajnish Kumar &amp; Others on 2 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-04-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-26T11:52:01+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sumitra-jain-others-vs-sri-rajnish-kumar-others-on-2-april-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Smt. Sumitra Jain &amp; Others vs Sri Rajnish Kumar &amp; Others on 2 April, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/127570","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=127570"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/127570\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=127570"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=127570"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=127570"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}