-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 363 of 2023 Bodho Mahto, Aged about 67 years Son of Late Dayal Mahto, Resident of Village Pratappur, Panchayat Shakhawara, Block Birni, P.O. Jawahar Nagar, P.S. Birni, District Giridih, State Jharkhand. ..... … Petitioner Versus 1. Bhuneshwar Mahto son of Late Dayal Mahto, Resident of Village Pratappur, Panchayat Shakhawara, Block Birni, P.O. Jawahar Nagar, P.S. Birni, District Giridih, State Jharkhand. 2. Murti Devi wife of Bhuneshwar Mahto resident of Village Pratappur, Panchayat Shakhawara, Block Birni, P.O. Jawahar Nagar, P.S. Birni, District Giridih, State Jharkhand. ..... … Respondents -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Ankur Anand, Advocate. ------ 06/ 02.01.2025 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the order dated 24.01.2023, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)-XXIII, Giridih, in Title Suit No. 48 of 2010 [Original Suit No. 452 of 2019], pending in that court. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that by the order dated 24.01.2023, the learned court has been pleased to recall ex-parte order dated 06.06.2018, whereby the evidence of the defendants were closed and the suit was directed to be posted for ex- parte disposal. He submits that the learned court in absence of any cogent reason, has been pleased to allow the petition filed by the respondents in view of that the said order is bad in law. 4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the learned court has taken care in passing the said order and reason has been provided and due to death of the defendant No. 1 and further the ill health of defendant No. 2, the defendants have not been able to appear before the learned court. He submits that in view of the above, the learned court has rightly passed the said order. 5. In the order dated 24.01.2023, after hearing both the sides, -2- the learned court has found that after the death of defendant No. 1, defendant No. 2 i.e. Bhuneshwar Mahto, who is husband of defendant No. 3 was ill and for his treatment the defendant No. 3 rushed to one hospital to another and lastly to Vellore for his treatment and in view of that the learned court has come to a conclusion that the defendants have not been able to adduce the evidence and in view of that the order dated 06.06.2018 was recalled and cost was also imposed upon the defendants. 6. In view of the said reason provided by the learned court and the suit was on contest, there is no illegality in the said order. If the suit is contested, both the parties are required to be given the full opportunity and that care has been taken care of by the learned court. No case of interference is made out, as such, this petition is dismissed. 7. In view of the observation of the learned court in the impugned order, the learned court will take the evidences of the defendants within a reasonable period, as pointed out that due to pendency of this petition, the delay has occurred. It is open for the parties to take all efforts for early disposal of the suit. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Amitesh/-