DAL BAHADUR LAMA Vs. RATNA KUMARI BASNET

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The points for consideration in this Civil Revision are covered by the provisions of Rule 7 of Order IX of the Civil P. C., 1908, a perusal whereof in the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Sangram Singh v. Election Tribunal (AIR 1955 SC 425) and in Arjun Singh v. Mohindra Kumar (AIR 1964 SC 993) makes it irresistibly clear that even if a defendant has not appeared at any earlier stage of the hearing of the suit, he can appear at any later stage and participate in the proceeding at and from that stage as a matter of right without even requiring to show any cause for his earlier non-appearance, but if he can assign good cause for such non-appearance before, he may even be allowed to set back the hands of the clock and to have all the earlier proceeding recalled and to have the suit heard in his presence ab initio as if he duly appeared at the commencement.

(2.) In the leading decision of the Supreme Court in Sangram Singh's case (AIR 1955 SC 425), Vivian Bose, J., solemnly reminded us (at 429) that there must be ever present in our mind that our laws of procedure are grounded on a principle of natural justice which requires that men should not be condemned unheard, that decisions should not be reached behind their backs, that proceedings that affect their lives and properties should not continue in their absence and that they should not be precluded from participating in them, unless the Code of procedure expressly provides to the contrary and that our laws of procedure should be construed, wherever reasonably possible, in the light of that principle and observed (at 432), as hereunder :-

(3.) In Arjun Singh's case (AIR 1964 SC 993), Ayyangar, J., after quoting from and relying on Sangram Singh's case (AIR 1955 SC 425) has observed (at 1004) as hereunder :-