MANOHAR SINGH Vs. D.S.SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is at the instance of an employee who is fighting against his erstwhile employer, respondent no.2 herein, for getting damages on account of the employer having conducted a malicious enquiry against him. He is aggrieved by the order dated 27.11.2010 passed by the trial Court whereby his application under Section 148 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC in short) for enlargement of time in making the payment of costs of adjournment imposed on him 09/02/04 has been dismissed.

(2.) THE petitioner-plaintiff had filed a suit for damages against the respondents for defaming him by holding a malicious domestic enquiry against him. On 07-01-2004, when the case was fixed for cross- examination of defendants' witness(DW-1) the petitioner-plaintiff had sought an adjournment because of non-availability of his counsel. THE learned trial Judge granted the adjournment but subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000/-. THE case was adjourned to 09.02.2004. THE costs were not paid on the adjourned date but no adverse order was passed on that date of hearing and thereafter on some ground or the other the trial was adjourned on many dates and finally on 27.03.05 the suit came to be dismissed by the trial Court by invoking Section 35-B CPC. Challenge to that order of dismissal of the suit before this Court failed and then petitioner-plaintiff approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court where he succeeded in getting an order for the revival of his suit. It was held by the Supreme Court in its order dated 13.12.2009 passed (in civil appeal no. 7554 - 7555 of 2009) that the suit could not be dismissed for non-payment of costs under Section 35B CPC. While disposing of the appeal the Hon'ble Supreme Court had observed in para no.6 of its order as under :-

(3.) THE learned trial Court noticed the pleas raised in opposition to that application on behalf of the respondents-defendants in para no.10 of the impugned order and the relevant part therefrom is re-produced below:-