- (1.) The petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India namely Civil Misc. Petition No.2023 of 2016 (Shri Panchayati Akhara Mahanirvani Vaidik Sanatan Bhartiya Dharmik Sanskriti Sansthan v. Ram Prakash Pathak & Anr.) has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 1.2.2016 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No.8, Varanasi in SCC Revision No.17 of 2015 (Ram Prakash Pathak v. Nagendra Upadhyay & Anr.) filed by the respondent No.1 whereby the Court below has set aside the order dated 30.5.2015 passed on the Application Paper No.4 Ga under Order IX Rule 13 C.P.C and remanded the matter back to the trial court to decide the said Application on merits after giving due opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.
(2.) In the connected Writ Petition No.58290 of 2014 (Shri Panchayati A.M.V.S.B.D.S. Sansthan v. A.D.J. Varanasi & 3 Ors.), the order dated 17.7.2013 passed by the Judge, Small Causes Court namely the Civil Judge, Varanasi in Misc. Case No.83 of 2012 (Ram Prakash Pathak v. Nagendra Upadhyay) on application under Section 17 of the Provincial Small Causes Court Act, 1887 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1887) and the order passed by the Revisional Court dated 15.9.2014 in S.C.C. Revision No.21 of 2013 (Panchayat Akhara v. Ram Prakash Pathak & Anr.) are under challenge.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Application Paper No.4 Ga filed for setting aside the ex-parte decree dated 9.12.2011 was not accompanied by an Application under Section 17 of the Act, 1887. The Application under Order IX Rule 13 C.P.C. was filed by the tenant-respondent No.3 on 6.8.2012 with the assertion that he came to know about the ex-parte decree dated 9.12.2011 only on 26.7.2012 when he met respondent No.1 namely Nagendra Upadhyay at Varanasi.;