DEV BALA SEHGAL Vs. DEVINDER PAL SEHGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A suit filed by Devinder Pal Sehgal was dismissed in default on 24.8.1988 under Order 9 Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short 'the Code). Thus, an application for the restoration of the suit under Order 9 Rule 9 of the Code was filed on 18.10.1988, which was allowed by the trial Court, by observing that the applicants-plaintiffs could not appear in the Court due to compelling reasons and circumstances beyond their control and their absence was not intentional.

(2.) THE legality of the impugned order has been challenged on the ground that the application was not filed within the prescribed period of limitation. Secondly, the application could not be allowed on the supposed grounds of "in the interest of justice". The impugned order, it is averred, is not only perverse but against the law and it has caused a failure of justice.

(3.) EARLIER application dated 18.10.1988 under Order 9 Rule 9 of the Code was dismissed in default for want of prosecution on 21.11.1994 and another application for its restoration was filed on 21.12.1994. The trial Court finding no merit in this application, dismissed it on 19.9.1995. Aggrieved by that order, a Civil revision No. 556 of 1996 was preferred by the plaintiff- petitioners in this Court and the same was allowed on August 27, 1996 by observing as under :-