SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1960 Supreme(Pat) 42

N.L.UNTWALIA
Chandrika Singh – Appellant
Versus
Parsidh Narayan Singh – Respondent


Judgment

N.L.Untwalia, J.

1. The petitioners suit was dismissed on the 20th September 1957 under Order 9, Rule 3, Civil Procedure Code, as neither he nor anybody on behalf of the defendants responded to the call for hearing of the case. Thereafter he filed an application under Order 9, Rule 4 for its restoration. That application also was dismissed for default on the 3rd December 1957. Thereafter the petitioner put in an application under Sec.151 of the Code for restoration of the miscellaneous case No. 57 of 1957 which was filed under Order 9, Rule 4. This application has been dismissed by the learned Munsif on the ground that the application under Sec.151 is not maintainable. No facts in support of this application have been investigated.

The application has been dismissed by placing reliance upon Ramghulam Singh V/s. Sheodeonarain Singh, 4 Pat LJ 287 : (AIR 1922 Pat 121). The view expressed in this case has been reiterated in a recent Full Bench decision of this Court in Doma Choudhary V/s. Ram Naresh Lal, 1958 Pat LR 413 : (AIR 1959 Pat 121), but the point of distinction, which has been rightly pointed out to me by Mr. U. C. Sharma appearing in support of this application, is th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top