ANANT RAM Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this petition, the Petitioner has challenged the order dated 27.6.1995 whereby his applications for restoration of the main revision petitions which were dismissed in default were rejected.

(2.) THE undisputed facts are that the present Petitioner had filed two revision petitions before the learned Financial Commissioner being Civil Revision No. 171 of 1982 titled Anant Ram v. Chunha and the second being Civil Revision No. 172 of 1982 titled Anant Ram v. Shakuntala. It is apparent that both these matters were heard together. It is also apparent from the record that the Petitioner used to appear in person and was not represented by any counsel.

(3.) ON 4th April, 1991 the Petitioner was not present and the two petitions were dismissed in default vide order dated 4.4.1991. Applications for restoration were filed and these applications being miscellaneous application No. 94 of 1991 and 95 of 1991 were taken up on 10.08.1992 when again the applicant did not appear and the applications were dismissed in default. Thereafter, two more applications being Misc. Application No. 144 of 1992 and 145 of 1992 for restoration of these applications were filed and due to non appearance of the Petitioner these applications were dismissed on 14.10.1992. However, as far as the order dated 14.10.1992 is concerned the same was recalled by the Financial Commissioner himself and therefore this Court is only concerned with the order dated 10.8.1992.