Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:74997 Court No. - 9 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3267 of 2019 Petitioner :- Lal Ji And 7 Others Respondent :- Prabhuram And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Singh Yadav Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J. Office report dated 11.12.2023 indicates that notice issued to respondent nos. 1 to 7 has not been returned back after service. In view of said office report, notice upon respondent nos. 1 to 7 is deemed sufficient. Heard learned counsel for petitioner. No one has put in appearance on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 7. The plaintiffs-petitioners had instituted a Civil Suit No. 126 of 1998. The said suit was dismissed for want of prosecution on 05.04.2008. An application for recalling the said order was moved under Order IX Rule 9 CPC which was allowed by trial court at a cost of Rs.1100/-. Against the said order, defendants-respondents had preferred a revision which has been allowed by order impugned. Having heard learned counsel for petitioner and perusing the material on record, I find that revisional court has exceeded its jurisdiction while allowing the revision filed by defendants. The trial court had recorded finding and had found that ground existed for recalling the said order and the same was recalled imposing a cost of Rs.1100/-. The revisional court had exceeded his jurisdiction in allowing the revision of the defendants and rejected the application filed by plaintiffs- petitioners. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that order impugned dated 14.02.2019 passed by revisional court is unsustainable in the eyes of law and the same is hereby set aside. The writ petition stands allowed. The original suit No. 126 of 1998 is restored to its original number. Trial court to proceed with the matter. Order Date :- 8.5.2025 V.S.Singh Digitally signed by :- VIDYA SAGAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad