TEK CHAND Vs. MAKHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner filed a suit for "recovery of Rs. 3,500/ - on 16th of October, 1985. On 7th of January, 1986 the suit was fixed for a matter on which the presence of the Plaintiff was not necessary. Due to Lawyers strike the counsel for the parties did not appear on the date of hearing and the case was dismissed in default under Order 9 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure. On 7th of February, 1986, the Plaintiff filed application under Order 9 Rule 4, of Code for restoration of the suit. Later on he filed an application for amendment of the said application to plead that he came to know of the order of dismissal of the suit in default on 6th of February, 1986. Therefore the application was within time. Both the applications have been dismissed by the trial Court vide two separate orders dated 28th of March, 1986. This is revision against the aforesaid orders.

(2.) AFTER hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and consideration of the matter, I am of the view that this revision petition deserves to succeed and the suit deserves to be restored.

(3.) FOR all the reasons given above, I condone a day's delay and set aside the order of the trial Court dated 7th of January, 1986 and restore the suit to be proceeded with from the stage before dismissed. The parties, through their counsel, are directed to appear in the trial Court on 18th of November, 1986.