N C CHANNABASAPPA Vs. ASSISTANT EDUCATION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter was dismissed for default on 22nd February, 1991. An application has been filed by the appellant with the affidavit of counsel stating that he was not able to be present when the appeal was called at the stage of admission because he was busy in another Court Hall and that his senior had left for Mysore on some urgent work. He has further averred that when he came back about 11:45 a.m. from the other Court Hall, this Court was not sitting and the appeal had been dismissed.

(2.) Whatever be the truth or otherwise about the allegations in regard to the counsel being engaged in another Court Hall and his senior having gone to Mysore, the averment that the Court had ceased to sit at 11:45 a.m. is apparently a false submission. That would have been enough to dismiss the application.

(3.) But there is an averment in the affidavit that the plaintiff-appellant has a good case on merits particularly in view of the divergent findings. I therefore asked the learned counsel to submit arguments on merits on the second appeal for admission. He has submitted his arguments. The application for restoration of the appeal is allowed, but the second appeal is dismissed as being devoid of merits for the following reasons.