Rajasthan High Court - JodhpurState Of Raj vs Baldeep Singh & Ors on 13 July, 2012Bench:Arun Mishra,Sangeet Lodha1


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                           AT JODHPUR

          D.B. Civil Misc. Restoration Application No.130/2011
                                    in
                D.B. Civil Special Appeal No.02677/2007

                           State of Rajasthan
                                   Vs.
                          Baldeep Singh & Ors.

                    DATE OF ORDER :: 13-07-2012


              HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA
               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA


Mr. Sandeep Bhandawat, for the State.

                                   ---In the writ application, orders passed by the Additional Collector

and Board of Revenue were questioned in which it was found that on

1.4.1966, son of the holder was major. Finding was recorded in this

regard by the Additional Collector in para 7 of the order; same was

affirmed by the Board of Revenue and the Single Bench, against which

the intra-court appeal had been preferred.The case was listed before this Court for removal of the defects

on 22.9.1998. In presence of the counsel, it was ordered that defects be

removed within a period of one week as prayed, failing which the appeal

shall stand dismissed without reference to the Bench. As order was not

complied with, appeal stood dismissed way back in the year 2008 itself.

Thus, application for restoration has been filed with an inordinate delay

of 936 days along with application underSection 5of the Limitation Act.The reason given for the delay is change of counsel in 2009; that

could not be a ground not to comply with the order passed by this Court

in presence of the counsel. Even otherwise, purely, finding of fact was2questioned in the writ application. As the concurrent findings of fact

          were recorded by the revenue courts, it was not open for the petitioner

          to question the same. The Single Bench was right in dismissing the writ

          application in the facts and circumstances of the case.We are not inclined to restore the appeal to its number as no

          useful purpose would be served. The restoration application is

          accordingly dismissed.[SANGEET LODHA],J.                                 [ARUN MISHRA],CJ.


Praveen