HARI KISHAN Vs. MADAN LAL SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India the Petitioner has challenged the order of the Additional Rent Controller dated 27th October 1986 whereby the application under Order 9 Rule 9 read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code for restoration of the petition for eviction was rejected. The petitioner has also challenged the order of the Additional Rent Controller dated 11th November 1986 whereby the application of the petitioner for review of the order dated 27th October 1986 was rejected.

(2.) The facts of the case in brief are as follows :

(3.) It was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that under Order 9 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Code a suit can be dismissed if neither party appears when the suit is called on for hearing. It was submitted that in the present case, on 17th September 1986 the case was not fixed for hearing but was only fixed for orders and, therefore, the Additional Rent Controller was not right in dismissing the suit in default. Learned counsel relied on Hukam Chand v. Mani Shibrat Dass & Another, AIR 1934 Lah. 984 in support of his contention.