- (1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant-society against the judgment of learned Single Judge dated 31.7.2013 whereby the writ petition filed by it has been dismissed. Briefly, the facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy involved, as available on record, may be noticed. A plot No. 443 measuring 396 square yards was allotted to Randhir Singh by the General body of the Animal Husbandry Cooperative House Building Society Limited-appellant (in short, "the Society") before the year 1989. Late Banwari Lal purchased this plot from him who expired on 23.11.2003. The nominees of late Banwari Lal approached the society for transferring the plot in their names. The petitioner society instead of transferring the plot, while passing a resolution, filed an arbitration case before the Arbitrator on the issue that the other plots were measuring 233 square yards while the plot in question was measuring 396 square yards but same price had been charged. The arbitrator dismissed the petition of the society vide order dated 18.9.2006. The society filed appeal before the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Hisar against the order dated 18.9.2006 which was also dismissed vide order dated 12.6.2007. Still not satisfied, the society filed revision petition before respondent No. 1. The said revision petition was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 29.10.2010 by the Special Secretary to Government, Haryana Cooperation Department, on an application filed by the appellant-society under Order 23 Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure alongwith affidavit of the Secretary dated 18.9.2010 stating therein that the plot in question had been resumed by it after passing a resolution dated 29.8.2010. Thereafter, application was filed by respondent No. 4 for recalling the order dated 29.10.2010 in which notice was received by the President of the society dated 13.12.2010 for hearing on 17.12.2010 on which date the appellant sought adjournment on the ground of engaging counsel. Meanwhile, the case was transferred to other officer. It was reserved on 20.7.2011 without giving any notice of date, time and place of hearing to the appellant society and was ultimately dismissed on 22.9.2011 and intimation was given to the appellant for applying certified copy of the order. The appellant-society challenged the said order by filing CWP No. 23199 of 2011 in this Court. Vide order dated 31.7.2013, impugned herein, the writ petition was dismissed by learned Single Judge. Hence the present Letters Patent Appeal by the appellant-society.
(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order had been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to it. Reliance was placed upon judgments in Mariamma Roy v. Indian Bank and others,2008 4 RCR(Civil) 910, Northern Indian Glass Industries Limited v. State of Haryana and others,2008 2 150 PunLR 459 and Ram Singh v. The Gandhar Agricultural Cooperative Service Society, Gandhar,1976 AIR(PH) 94
(3.) After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, we do not find any merit in the appeal.;