L MAHADEV Vs. A K ANANTHA KRISHNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent in these two appeals filed O. S. No. 78/70 and O. S. No. 88/70 on the file of the Civil Judge. Civil Station. Bangalore, The earlier suit is one for the recovery of Rs. 21.065/said to be due on a promissory note executed by the defendant. The second is a suit for the recovery of Rs. 7,563/- partly towards arrears of rent and partly towards mesne profits and for the recovery of possession of the property. These two cases were being posted together as the parties in both the cases are the same. The cases came up for hearing after series of adjournments on 2-4-1970. On 2-4-1970, the order sheet In O. S. No. 78/70 reads as follows :--

(2.) On 14-4-1970, the order sheet In O. S. 78 of 1970 reads:--

(3.) The defendant filed two petitions registered as Misc. Nos. 19 and 20 of 1970 praying that the decree pasted on 14-4-1970 and 18-4-1970 be set aside. He made these applications under Order 9 Rule 13 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. He pleaded that when he was going to fetch his counsel he met with an accident and therefore he could not attend the Court as he intended to do on 14-4-1970. This application was opposed by the respondent denying the allegations made in the petition relating to facts and also raising an objection regarding the maintainability of the petitions. His contention is that the orders passed on 144-1970 in O, S. 78/70 and OP 18-4-70 in O. S. No. 88/70 are orders made under the provision of Order 17, Rule 3, Civil P. C. and therefore the applications are not maintainable. The learned Civil Judge has taken the view that the decisions made by the Court on 14-4-1970 and 18-4-1970 are judgments coming within the purview of Order 17. Rule 3, Civil P. C., and therefore holds that the petitions cannot lie and dismissed the petitions.