JUDGMENT

Raj Mohan Singh, J. (Oral) - Suit of the plaintiffs/petitioners was dismissed in default vide order dated 01.12.2015 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) Panchkula. An application was filed for restoration of the suit on 07.12.2015 on the ground that in fact due to wrong noting of date i.e. 07.12.2015 instead of 01.12.2015, the counsel could not appear on 01.12.2015 and the suit was dismissed in default. The application for restoration of the suit was filed on 07.12.2015, which was dismissed vide order dated 20.10.2016.

2. As per Order 43, Rule 1(c) CPC, the aforesaid order was appealable. An appeal was filed before the lower Appellate Court, but the same was dismissed as not maintainable by observing that civil revision was maintainable against the order dated 20.10.2016 which was alleged to be under Order 9, Rule 4 CPC.

3. In fact, the perusal of the record would show that the suit was dismissed under Order 9, Rule 8 CPC. A factual mistake was committed by the lower Appellate Court in appreciating the nature of impugned order passed by the trial Court.

4. While drafting the present revision petition, the petitioners have not challenged the order dated 22.11.2016 passed b