- (1.) M. Katju, J. This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 7. 7. 95 passed in Appeal No. 77 of 1990, Annexure-5 to the petition, order dated 22. 5. 90 passed in Misc. Case No. 62 of 1985, Annexure-4 to the petition, and order dated 21. 7. 84 passed in Execution Case No. 21 of 1970.
(2.) IN have heard learned Counsels for parties. The facts of the case are that Suit No. 64 of 1948 for redemption of mortgage was filed by Ram Kishan against the petitioner. During the pendency of the suit Ram Kishan died and was substituted by Smt. Bhagwati Devi and others. This suit was decreed by the Civil Judge, Mathura on 20. 3. 51 and in execution of the decree the decree holder was put in possession. Against the aforesaid Judgment the petitioner Ttfakur Radhey Shyam Ji Maharaj filed an appeal which was allowed by A. D. J. , Mathura on 25. 1. 61 and the suit was dismissed. An application under section 144, C. P. C. was allowed and hence possession was delivered to the petitioner on 28. 4. 65. Subsequently a second appeal was filed against the judgment dated 25. 1. 61 being Appeal No. 3802 of 1961 and which was allowed by the High Court on 17. 7. 69 and the matter was remanded for fresh decision by the first appellate Court. Consequently an application under Section 144, C. P. C. was filed by the respondent which was registered as Misc. Case No. 21 of 1970. The petitioner filed objection to this application on 22. 8. 70. Subsequent to the remand order of the High Court the first appeal of the petitioner was allowed on 13. 10. 71 and the suit of the plaintiff was again dismissed. However, a second appeal against the said judgment was filed again in the High Court and the High Court again allowed the second appeal on 29. 9. 80.
(3.) THE application under Section 144, C. P. C. was allowed by the Civil Judge, Mathura on 21. 7. 84 vide Annexure-1 to this petition. THE petitioner filed an appeal on 6. 4. 85 for setting aside the order dated 21. 7. 84 along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act vide Annexure-2 to the petition. Objections were filed to this application by the plaintiff vide Annexure-3. By order 22. 5. 90 the said application as well as application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act were dismissed vice Annexure to the petition. Misc. Appeal No. 77 of 1990 was dismissed by IV A. D. J. , Mathura by order dated 7. 7. 95 vide Annexure 5 to the writ petition. This writ petition has been filed against the said order dated 7. 7. 95. After hearing Counsels for the parties. I am of the opinion that there is no merit in this petition. The main case has been decided finally by the Court by its judgment in Second Appeal decided on 29. 9. 80 as stated in para 10 of the writ petition. As a consequence to this judgment which has become final, restitution has to be granted to the plaintiff under Section 144, C. P. C. Hence there is no force in this petition and it is accordingly dismissed. Petition dismissed. .;