DWARKA DAS BABU RAM Vs. VAISH FLOUR MILL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision from an order of the Subordinate Judge of Agra dismissing an application for the restoration of a previous application under Order 21, Rule 90, Civil P.C.

(2.) After the sale had taken place the applicant applied to have it set aside on the ground of material irregularities and fraud as well as substantial loss. On three occasions he took steps to get service effected on the opposite party but each time the summons was returned with the report that he could not be found. On the fourth occasion the Court ordered him to deposit the necessary costs, but he failed to do so on the date fixed and no one appeared on his behalf. The application was accordingly dismissed on 3 August 1929.

(3.) The applicant then applied to have the dismissal set aside on the ground that he had been ill and could not attend the Court. He subsequently filed an affidavit in support of his application. The application did not expressly mention that it was made under Order 9, Civil P.C.