RAJMAL HONDA Vs. SAMUNDER SINGH RATHI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has filed this petition challenging the orders dated 06.11.2008 and 05.04.2011.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had been pursuing his case since the year 1994. Petitioner had led his entire evidence. However, due to his ill health, petitioner could not appear before the trial Court on 07.05.2013. Consequently, application moved by the petitioner for restoration of the case was liable to be allowed. In support of his arguments, learned counsel has placed reliance on N. Balakrishnan versus M. Krishnamurthy, : 1998 -LAWS(SC) 9 -7, wherein it was held as under:

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the respondents, on the other hand has opposed the petition and has submitted that the Courts below had rightly dismissed the application moved by the petitioner for restoration of the case. In fact, the Appellate Court while dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner had taken in consideration the conduct of the petitioner. In support of his arguments, learned counsel has placed reliance on Smt. Dev Bala Sehgal versus Devinder Pal Sehgal,, 2001(4) R.C.R. (Civil) 757, wherein it was held as under: