HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 8151 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J. 1. This petition has been filed for the following relief:- " i) Issue an appropriate order or direction to set-aside the Judgment and order dated 11.09.2021 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division) Jalaun at Orai in Original Suit No.-116 of 2021 (Sriramchandra Ji Mahraj Vs. Rajpal Yadav and others) as well as decree dated 27.09.2021 passed by passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division) Jalaun at Orai in Original Suit No.-116 of 2021 (Sriramchandra Ji Mahraj Vs. Rajpal Yadav and others) (Annexure No. 1 & 1-A) respectably to this petition." 2. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that Original Suit No. 116 of 2021 was filed by the plaintiff-respondent for a declaration that he may be declared as Muhtamim/ Manager of Sri Ramchandraji Maharaj Virajman Mandir,Village Akeenwa, Pargana Konch, District Jalaun. The said suit was decreed on the basis of a compromise before the Lok Adalat by judgment and order dated 11.09.2021 as well as decree dated 27.09.2021. It has been submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the earlier Sevayat has executed a registered Will in favour of the petitioner and he is the person interested in the suit and without impleading the petitioner, the suit got decreed by means of a compromise by playing fraud upon the court. It has also been contended by counsel for the petitioner that such a suit was not maintainable in view of Section 92 of C.P.C. 3. Be that as it may, since petitioner is claiming rights over the Thakur Ji Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashwani Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ram Ji Chaturvedi .....Petitioner(s) Sri Ramchandraji Maharaj Virajman Mandir And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) and is aggrieved by the decree passed by Lok Adalat, which according to the petitioner was obtained by playing fraud upon the court, in my view, it would be more appropriate that the petitioner may file an application for recall taking all the grounds which are available to the petitioner within a period of two weeks. In case, such an application is moved by the petitioner, the same shall be considered and decided by the court below within six months after ensuring service on the other side as well as providing opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties provided there is no other legal impediment. The court below shall also look into the matter whether such a suit was maintainable in view of Section 92 of C.P.C. 4. With these observations, the petition stands disposed of. October 10, 2025 Nitika Sri. A227 No. 8151 of 2025 2 (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- NITIKA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad