PARKASH WATI Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against order dated November 2, 1987 passed by Sub-Judge Ist Class, Rohtak restoring the suit which was dismissed in default.

(2.) Punjab National Bank filed suit for the recovery of Rs. 90,928.25. This suit was dismissed on November 11, 1985 under Order 9, rules 2 and 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure as nobody on behalf of the plaintiff appeared and process fee and proclamation felt were also not deposited. At this stage it may be pointed out the defendants were not served by the time the suit was dismissed on November 20, 1985. An application for restoration of the suit was filed on June 13, 1986 inter alia on the allegation that Shri Vijay Mehra, Advocate, engaged on behalf of the plaintiff-Bank had left the practice and did not inform the Bank about the proceedings. It was subsequently that another counsel was engaged who informed the Bank about the dismissal of the suit. Thus, there was no fault on the part of the plaintiff.

(3.) Shri O.P. Sharma, advocate appearing on behalf the petitioner defendant has argued that neither any application under section 5 of the Limitation Act was filed nor the trial Court condoned the delay while passing the impugned order and the application for restoration of the suit ought to have been dismissed as barred by limitation.