LAL CHAND RAJORA Vs. SANT LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has impugned the judgment and decree dated 02.09.2009 which has endorsed the finding of the trial Judge dated 26.02.2001. Vide judgment and decree dated 26.02.2001 an ex-parte decree had been passed in favour of the plaintiff Sant Lal; the impugned judgment had dismissed the appeal; the appeal had been dismissed on limitation; it was held that there was a delay of seven years and seven days delay in filing the appeal; dismissal of the appeal had resulted in endorsement of the decree of the trial Judge.

(2.) THE plaintiff had filed the present suit against the defendant for dissolution of partnership and for rendition of accounts. Further details of the case are not necessary for the disposal of this appeal.

(3.) ON behalf of the appellant, it has been urged that "sufficient cause" has to be construed with a liberal mind which should be a justice oriented approach. To support this proposition reliance has been placed upon (1987) 2 SCC 107 Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and another Vs. Mst. Katiji and others as also another judgment of the Apex Court reported in (2005) 3 SCC 752 State of Nagaland Vs. Lipok AO and others. Reliance has also been placed Khurshed Banoo Vs. Vasant upon AIR 2003 Bombay 52 Mallikarjun Manthalkar to support his submission that only when the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code is decided, can resort be taken to proceedings under Section 96 of the Code. The impugned judgment is liable to be set aside.