KALAGARA HARI BABU Vs. E KRISHNA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant herein was the original plaintiff in O.S.No. 124 of 1985 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Kovvur, West Godavari District. The plaintiff filed the said suit for compensation from the defendants-respondents herein for using defamatory words against the petitioner herein. The said suit was dismissed for default. Therefore, the appellant herein filed an application I.A.No. 1063 of 1994 in the same Court for restoring the suit to file under Order 9 Rule 9 C.P.C. after setting aside the default order dated 15-9-1994. It appears from the record that the said application was dismissed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Kovvur. Against the said order, the present appeal has been filed by the appellant herein.

(2.) It appears from the record that the suit was fixed for hearing after adjourning the same (on) two or three occasions and the appellant herein was directed to lead evidence, but the appellant herein refused to lead evidence and therefore the learned Judge dismissed I.A. No. 1063 of 1994 with the following observations:

(3.) The learned counsel Mr. P. Girish Kumar appearing on behalf of the appellant herein submitted that the order passed by the learned Judge is an order under Order 17 Rule 2 C.P.C. and therefore the suit can be restored under Order 9 Rule 9 C.P.C. and the learned Judge ought to have restored the suit to file. While rebutting the aforesaid arguments, the learned counsel for the respondents herein submitted that the order passed by the learned Judge is not an order under Order 17 Rule 2 C.P.C. but it is an order under Order 17 Rule 3 C.P.C.