Bakshish Kaur, J. - (1.) This revision is directed against the order dated 10.3.1998 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jind, on an application under Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, filed by the plaintiffs for restoration of the suit.
(2.) Krishan Lal alongwith his brothers Amarjit and Paramjit had filed a suit for permanent injunction. It was registered at No. 167/7.7.1997, titled Krishan Lal etc. v/s. Bhag -wan Dass etc. It was contested by Bhagwan Dass and otheRs. Issues arising from the pleadings of the parties were framed. The evidence of the plaintiffs was closed by order, Since the order passed by the trial court under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of the Code was under challenge before the first Appellate Court, therefore the learned Additional District Judge, Jind disposed of the appeal vide order dated 2.9.1997 with a direction to the trial court to decide the suit within four months from the date of appearance of the parties.
(3.) When the case was at the stage of recording defendants evidence fixed for 18.11.1997 the defendants Bhagwan Dass and others had taken Krishan Lal alongwith them and withdrew the suit. Paramjit one of the plaintiffs now applicant was not a party, to the withdrawal of the suit i.e. he had never made any request nor he gave his consent for the withdrawal of the suit, therefore, the defendants in collusion with each other had committed fraud on the applicant as well as on the court. When he came to know about the fact, he moved an application under Sec. 151 of the Code of restoration of Suit No. 167 of 1997. This application has been partly allowed by the trial Court whereby the suit has been restored to its original stage. However, it was ordered/clarified that the suit against plaintiff -respondents Krishan Lal and Amarjit shall stand withdrawn.;