BADRI PERSHAD Vs. MOOL CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard this appeal after a notice to show cause was issued. As the appeal can be decided immediately, we admit the same.

(2.) The judgment under appeal is one of the most surprising judgments we have come across. In the suit instituted under Order 37 Civil P.C. based on a pronote summons was served on the defendant who put in appearance. The summons for judgment was applied for and the defendant filed an application for leave to defend within the time permitted by the Code. The learned Sub Judge passed an order granting time to the plaintiff to file a reply to the application and also for arguments. In an order, which is practically undecipherable, he appears to have marked the case for hearing on 27-5-1985, but then appears to have changed the date in his own hand to 13-5-85 by striking out "27" and writing "13", On 13-5-85, he passed the judgment under appeal refusing leave to defend and decreeing the suit with costs.

(3.) The surprising feature of the case which has been hinted at earlier is that the fact that in this judgment he has referred to the application as well as the reply filed by the plaintiff. In fact, no reply was filed by the plaintiff. The order under appeal contains :