RATTAN SINGH Vs. KARAM CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been preferred under Order 41, Rule 19 read with section 151, C. P. C. and also under section 5 of the Limitation Act for restoration and re -admission of the appeal and application (C. M. P. No. 256/95) dismissed in default on 31st May, 1995.

(2.) The brief facts giving rise to the present proceedings are that R. S A No 272/92 after admission had been fixed for hearing for 29th March, 1995 alongwith C. M. P. No 374/92. On the aforesaid date neither the appellant nor the learned Counsel appeared when the case was called and accordingly the appeal as well as C. M. P. were ordered to be dismissed in default.

(3.) Thereafter, on 18th April, 1995 application registered as C. M. P. No. 256 of 1995 was preferred for restoration of the appeal dismissed in default on 29th March, 1995. The grounds for restoration of the appeal, as pleaded in the application, had been that the respondents had not filed any reply to the application for stay and the counsel for the applicant -appellant had gone to Mandi on 25th March, 1995 for some domestic affairs though he contacted one of his colleagues telephonically to appear on his behalf in the case but unfortunately he could also not appear in the case on the date fixed by the Court. It had also been pleaded in the application that the counsel was under the impression that in view of non -filing of the reply to the stay application by the respondents, the case was to be adjourned by the Court on the request of the respondents, but the appeal itself was dismissed in default though the application for stay was listed for orders.