H.R.PANWAR
KAMI DAN SINGH – Appellant
Versus
RAM CHANDRA – Respondent
H. R. PANWAR, J.
( 1 ) THIS appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 (d) read with Order 9, Rule 9, CPC is directed against the order dated 19-12-97 passed by Additional District Judge No. 1, Bikaner (hereinafter referred to as the trial Court) whereby the application filed by the plaintiff-appellant for restoration of the suit was dismissed for want of payment of process fee and filing of notices for service on defendant-respondents. Aggrieved by the order impugned of the trial Court, the plaintiff-appellant has preferred the present appeal.
( 2 ) BRIEFLY stated facts to the extent they are relevant and necessary for disposal of this appeal are that on 10-2-1981 the plaintiff-appellant originally filed a suit for declaration and possession with other consequential reliefs in respect of the property in dispute. The original suit was posted for the plaintiffs evidence on 2-3-94. On this date neither the plaintiff nor his counsel appeared and the trial Court dismissed the suit for default. Against the order dated 2-3-94, the plaintiff-appellant filed an application on 31-3-94 seeking restoration of the original suit which was dismissed on account of nonappearance of plaintiff-appellant
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.