- (1.) B. K. Roy, J. The petitioner decree holder prays to quash the order dated 2-3-1988 passed by 2nd Additional District Judge, Allahabad in Civil Revision No. 81 of 1988 allowing Civil Revision No. 81/88 as well as the second objection of respondent No. 3 preferred under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(2.) MANIFOLD submissions were made at the Bar by the learned counsel for the petitioner Shri Kameshwar Prasad but in view of the nature of the order, which I propose to pass, I need no mention all of them except that the order impugned was passed without giving any opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner violating the principle of natural justice and, thus, is liable to be set aside on this ground alone. Shri Ashok Bhushan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 3, very fairly states that it is a fact that the order in question was passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. I am somewhat surprised in finding that the learned Additional District Judge has not cared to adhere to the principles of natural justice requiring imperatively to give an opportunity of hearing to the opposite party to a civil revision application.
(3.) FOR the reasons aforementioned the impugned order cannot be sustained and is held to be without jurisdiction. This writ petition succeeds in part. The impugned revisional order is set aside and Civil Revision No. 81 of 1988 is remitted back to the Court of 2nd Additional District Judge, Allahabad for fresh consideration in accordance with law. Since considerable time has elapsed, in the interest of justice I also direct the petitioner and respondent No. 3 to appear before the learned Additional District Judge who shall fix a date of hearing on the civil revision application and thereafter decide it expeditiously in accordance with law by giving a fresh opportunity 10 both sides.;