CHAJU RAM Vs. REVENUE MINISTER, J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON May 5, 1976 we dismissed Letters patent Appeal (Writ) No. 5 of 1974 making the following order :

(2.) BY this application, the petitioner has sought an order re -admitting the appeal. At the preliminary hearing of the application on 19 -5 -1976 we proposed to issue notice to the respondents to show cause why the order for re -admission of appeal should not be made. But the learned counsel for the petitioner argued that, as a matter of law, it was not necessary to do so. He, however, sought time to ascertain if there was any authority on this point. Accordingly the case as adjourned to the following day when he appeared and informed us that he could not find any such authority. At this stage, the short point for our consideration is whether an order for re -admission of an appeal dismissed for default of appearance of the appellant at the preliminary hearing can be made without notice to the respondents. O. 41 R. 11 provides as under:

(3.) CLEARLY the order of dismissal dated 5th May, 1976 is one falling under sub -rule 2. Where that is so, an application for restoration of the appeal can be judged under O. 41 R. 19 which reads :