AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This revision petition has been filed challenging the order dated 09.12.2016 passed in I.A. No.297 of 2016 in O.S. No.122 of 2008 by the Junior Civil
Judge at Narayanpet.
The revision petitioner is the 5th defendant and the 2nd respondent herein is the plaintiff in O.S. No.122 of 2008. The said suit is instituted for partition
and separate possession in respect of several agricultural lands admeasuring Acs.9.12 guntas situated within the limits of Alampally village, Maganoor
Mandal, Mahabubnagar District (now Narayanpet District).
The 1st respondent herein, who is the 4th defendant in the suit, filed I.A. No.297 of 2016 under Section 151 CPC seeking to permit her to contest the
case by setting aside the dismissal order dated 20.07.2009. In the said application it is stated that she came to know about one month back about the
pendency of the suit. The plaintiff with dishonest intention and in order to deprive her share has not paid process fee for service of summons on her.
The suit was dismissed as against the 1st respondent/4th defendant on 20.07.2009 for non payment of process fee. It is also stated that the scheduled
properties are ancestral properties and she is entitled to equal share along with plaintiff and other defendants and they are doing joint cultivation. The
Court below vide impugned order dated 09.12.2016 allowed the application and permitted the 1st respondent/ 4th defendant to contest the suit filed by
the plaintiff and consequently received the written statement filed along with the said application by setting aside the dismissal order dated 20.07.2009.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material placed on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that there is collusion between the 1st respondent/4th defendant and the 2nd
respondent/plaintiff. The 1st respondent/4th defendant does not have any interest in the suit schedule properties and if the 1st respondent/4th
defendant is aggrieved by the dismissal order for non payment of process fee, she ought to have filed a separate suit.
It is a matter of record that the suit was dismissed as against the 1st respondent/4th defendant for non payment of process fee and an application was
filed by her under Section 151 CPC seeking to permit her to contest the suit by setting aside the dismissal order. Learned counsel for the petitioner has
not been able to point out any provision under CPC which the 1st respondent/4th defendant could have invoked in the available circumstances,
wherein it is not the fault of the 1st respondent/4th defendant but it is the fault of the plaintiff on account of which the suit was dismissed for default.
Thus, this Court does not find any error committed by the Court below in entertaining the application filed under Section 151 CPC. The revision
petitioner, who is the 5th defendant in the suit, has got no role in the facts and circumstances of the case to oppose the application in I.A. No.297 of
2016 in O.S. No.122 of 2008. There are no merits in this revision petition.
Accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.