HARINDER SINGH Vs. KULDEEP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has challenged order dated 12th May, 2010 passed by Additional District Judge Delhi, vide which application of petitioner filed under Order 9 Rule 7 read with section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure (for short as "Code") was dismissed with costs of Rs.4,000/-.

(2.) Respondent herein, filed a suit for recovery of Rs.3,11,818/- along with interest against the petitioner and respondent no.2. As per list of dates, counsel for petitioner who had been appearing and contesting the case on behalf of petitioner, did not appear in the matter on 21st August, 2007 and as such case was adjourned to 27th September, 2007, on which date again petitioner counsel did not appear. On the adjourned date, i.e. 30th October, 2007, court was on leave and matter was adjourned to 3rd November, 2007. On 3rd November 2007, the matter was adjourned for 7th January, 2008 and again counsel for petitioner, did not appear on that day and as such, petitioner was proceeded ex parte.

(3.) It is contended by learned counsel that petitioner came to know about ex parte order dated 7th January, 2008, only on 30th January, 2010, when new counsel engaged by petitioner, inspected the case file. Earlier counsel had assured the petitioner that he will appear and take care of the case and call the petitioner as and when required. Thus, petitioner was under bonafide impression and belief that counsel would inform him, as and when required.