RAM SEVAK SAH Vs. NATHUNI SAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) This application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 29.01.2019 passed in Misc. Case No. 02 of 2017 by the learned District Judge, Sitamarhi whereby the application filed under the provision of Order 9 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure for restoration of Probate Case No. 07 of 2015 has been rejected.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the court below failed to appreciate the evidence adduced on behalf of the petitioner. He contended that four witnesses examined on behalf of the petitioner had stated that the petitioner had gone to Delhi for earning his livelihood instructing his Pairvikar to take necessary steps in the case. It also failed to appreciate that for the fault on the part of Pairvikar, the petitioner would suffer irreparable loss and injury if restoration is not allowed.