SREE PRAKASH SINGH Vs. TRISHIT DHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. G. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner, who has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against an order dtd. 24/5/2023 passed by the learned Court of Civil Judge, No. 1, Cachar, Silchar in Misc. (J) Case No. 28/2022 in connection with Misc. (J) Case No. 29/2022 in TS No. 113/2022.

(2.) The petitioner was the defendant against whom under certain circumstances, an ex-parte order was passed which the petitioner was not aware of. Ultimately, the petitioner had approached the learned Court by filing an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC along with an application under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay. The said petition filed under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act has been dismissed resulting in consequential dismissal of the petition in Order 9 Rule 13.

(3.) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shyam Sundar Sarma Vs Pannalal Jaiswal and Ors. reported in (2005) 1 SCC 436 has held that dismissal of an application under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act would also mean a dismissal of the entire case and therefore an appeal would lie. In paragraphs 14 and 15, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down as follows:-