LAKHINDRA MAHTO Vs. PACHI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the opposite parties.

(2.) The present civil revision is directed against the order dtd. 17/9/2009 passed by Additional Munsif-I, Ranchi in Misc. Case No. 2 of 2008, arising out of Title Suit No. 217 of 2006, whereby and whereunder an application under Order IX Rule 9 read with Sec. 151 C.P.C. filed by the plaintiffs / opposite parties has been allowed on contest subject to payment of cost of Rs.500.00 to be paid to the defendants.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners assailing the impugned order has contended that Title Suit No. 217 of 2006 was dismissed for non-filing of requisite for issuance of summons against the defendants. Therefore, the restoration application might have been filed by the plaintiff / opposite party under Order IX Rule 4 of C.P.C. instead of an application under Order IX Rule 9 C.P.C.