RAGUBIR SINGH Vs. LADURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application for restoration of Civil First Appeal No. 34 of 1956 which was dismissed for non-prosecution.

(2.) THE appeal was filed on 16th July. 1956; but it appears that the court fee paid on the memorandum of appeal was insufficient. THE appellant's counsel applied for condonation of delay to enable him to pay the deficit court fee. One Mr. J. D. Agarwal filed Vakalatnama on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 to 3 in the appeal on 18th December, 1956 and opposed the application for extension of time for payment of court fee. THEreafter Mr. R. K. Rastogi also appeared. It is stated before us that he actually appeared on behalf of the respondent No. 3. THE matter for condonation of delay in filing the court fee was put up for hearing in due course and the delay was condoned by an order of this Court dated 3rd October 1958. Mr. Rastogi wanted to contest this order and eventually on 23rd February, 1959 the order for condoning the delay for payment of court fee was affirmed by this Court in the presence of the learned counsel. It appears that in the earlier order dated 3rd October, 1958, the court had directed that after admitting the appeal the office should proceed according to law. Accordingly the office directed that notices of the appeal should be served upon the respondents. THE learned counsel for the appellant submitted to the order and deposited the requisite Talbana and processes for service on the respondents. On this occasion notice appears to have been served on the respondent No. 1 only, but no service could be effected on respondents Nos. 2 and 3 and therefore, the appellant was directed to supply fresh Talbana and processes for service on these respondents. As this Talbana was not deposited within time the matter was put up before the Court on 10th March, 1959 for dismissal of the appeal. THE Court then ordered that if the process fee and summonses were not filed within ten days from the date of the order, the appeal should Stand dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal stood dismissed on the terms of the order and a record to that effect was made by the Deputy Registrar on the 31st of March, 1959.