MANGILAL GOSAI Vs. PRAHLAD KEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has filed this misc. appeal against the order dated 2.4.1997 passed in M.J.C. No. 21 of 1996 by which the Tribunal has dismissed application for restoration under Order IX, rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the Code').

(2.) The appellant had filed one Claim Case No. 51 of 1996. The appellant was prosecuting the case before the Tribunal and the case was fixed for filing of written statement on 25.6.1996. On that day the appellant could not appear and the case was dismissed in default. On 20.7.96, the appellant filed an application under Order IX, rule 9 of the Code for restoration on the ground that the learned senior counsel for the appellant had gone to Masoori and local counsel Mr. Patil could not appear because case was listed for filing of written statement and there was nothing to be done on behalf of the appellant on that day of 25.6.1996. The aforesaid application was supported by an affidavit of a senior counsel of Dhar as well as of the appellant. The aforesaid application was registered as M.J.C. No. 21 of 1996. The record of the original claim case was called. The arguments were heard and the application was dismissed by order dated 2.4.1997 on the ground that no sufficient cause is made out, against which this appeal has been preferred.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the court.