SHYAM SUNDER Vs. BHAURENLAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal, which has been preferred by the plaintiff appellant, wherein, by the impugned order under challenge, i.e. dated 13th August, 2015, his application under Order 41 Rule 19 of the C.P.C., seeking recall of the order dismissing the appeal for want of prosecution has been rejected, consequently, he has invoked the appellate provision contemplated under Order 43 Rule 1(t) of the CPC.

(2.) Brief facts leading to the institution of the present appeal is that the plaintiff appellant instituted a regular suit which was dismissed on 16.01.2015, against which, he has preferred an appeal, being Appeal No. 29 of 2012, Shyam Sunder Vs. Shri Bhaurenlal and others. It is the case of the appellant that the appeal was listed on 16th January, 2015, but, on account of the fact that he was ailing and his counsel did not provide him with the information pertaining to the date fixed before the Appellate Court, he could not gather the knowledge of the appeal being listed on 16th January, 2015, consequently, the said appeal was dismissed on 16th January, 2015, for want of prosecution.

(3.) For the purpose of deriving the knowledge of the order, in the application as filed under Order 41 Rule 19 C.P.C., the appellant contended that he could get the knowledge of the dismissal of the appeal only on 16th January, 2015 by an information which was imparted by Mr. Sushil Kumar, who was opposite party No. 4 in the said appeal.