BHANDARI INTERSTATE CARRIERS Vs. PARMESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed an order dated 12th April 2007 of learned civil Judge, dismissing an application of the petitioner under Order 9 Rule 7 of the CPC (wrongly filed by the petitioner under Order 9 Rule 13 of CPC) for setting aside the ex parte order dated 6th November 2006.

(2.) THE contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner on 28th february 2006 was present in the Court and the Court gave next date of hearing as 14th July 2006, but inadvertently the associate counsel of the main counsel noted the date as 14th September 2006 and accordingly the counsel was under the bona fide impression that the case was adjourned to 14th September 2006. The learned Civil Judge, however, found no merits in this excuse taken by the counsel for the petitioner. He found that the defendant (petitioner herein) has not placed on record copy of the diary of the counsel neither affidavit of associate counsel. A perusal of the record showed that the defendant was in the habit of not appearing in the case. The defendant had not appeared on 24th december 2005, 5th November 2005, 22nd July 2005, 28th July 2005, 6th July 2005, 3rd January 2005 and 30th September 2004 The petitioner preferred an appeal against the order of the Civil Judge which was held not maintainable and was dismissed. The petitioner thereafter preferred the instant petition under article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) A perusal of the application filed by the petitioner before the trial court would show that even the application under Order 9 Rule 7 was filed on 16th October 2006 and not immediately after 14th September 2006, the date which counsel stated he had noted. The plea taken by the counsel for the petitioner that he noted a wrong date was rightly disbelieved by the trial court. It must be remembered that now the entire court management is computerized and by a click of mouse, the party or the advocate can find the order passed on the particular date and also can also find out the next date fixed in the case. The cause list is also available on the website of the Court. It is normal routine of every party and counsel to verify the dates noted by it from the Court's website. The excuse of noting wrong dates cannot be entertained after computerization of the courts. Even otherwise, the effort of the defendant seems to prolong the proceedings. Non appearance of the defendant is habitual. The excuse of noting wrong date does not inspire confidence nor seems to be true. The trial court rightly dismissed the application.