(1.) THIS Civil Revision is directed against order dated 26 -12 -2005 of 1st Additional District Judge, Jammu, whereby he rejected the application of
the petitioner seeking setting aside of decree dated 21st of May, 1994,
passed under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(2.) FACTS , giving rise to this Civil Revision, may be stated thus:
A suit, filed under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, for recovery of Rs.57,000/ -, was decreed on 21st of May, 1994, by learned 1st Additional District Judge, Jammu. Petitioner was served with summons on 04 -06 -1993. He did not enter appearance within the prescribed period. An application for condonation of delay filed on 12th of July, 1993, was rejected, resulting in consequent decree against the petitioner. An appeal against the decree was filed by the petitioner in this Court. This appeal, registered as CIA No.47/1994, was dismissed on merits on 09 -08 -1999. A Letters Patent Appeal was preferred against the judgment of learned Single Judge of this Court. The petitioner was directed by the Appellate Court to deposit the decretal amount along with interest accrued thereon. The petitioner, however, failed to do so. The Letters Patent Bench, accordingly, passed order on 28 -04 -2000, providing last chance of two weeks to herein petitioner to deposit the decretal amount along with interest, failing which the appeal was to be dismissed. The appellant failed to comply with this order of the Court too and, ultimately, LPA(C) No.45/1999 of the petitioner was dismissed on 20th of July, 2000, of course, in default of appearance of the petitioner. This LPA appears to have been revived, whereafter the counsel for the parties were heard and the Division Bench directed dismissal of the LPA in terms of its order dated 22nd of November, 2001.
(3.) DURING the currency of execution proceedings taken out by the decree holder, the petitioner -judgment -debtor offered to pay the decretal
amount in instalments. A consensus was arrived at between the litigating
parties and their counsel that the petitioner -judgment -debtor, would
deposit a sum of Rs,25,000/ - in lump -sum and, thereafter, pay a sum of
Rs.5,000/ - per month regularly, without making more than two defaults and
in case there was default by the judgment -debtor, he would become liable
to pay whole of the decretal amount. The Executing Court, accordingly,
passed an order on 01 -08 -2002 and disposed of the execution application
in terms of the compromise arrived at by the parties.
The decree appears to have remained unsatisfied, whereafter the judgment -debtor, filed yet another application under Order XXXVII Rule 4
of the Code of Civil Procedure, on 30th of November, 2005, seeking
setting aside of decree dated 21st of May, 1994. This application was
rejected by learned 1st Additional District Judge, Jammu, vide his order
dated 26 -12 -2005.;