Civil Revision No.721 of 2009 -1-
****
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Civil Revision No.721 of 2009
Date of decision: 10.2.2009
Subhash ...Petitioner
Versus
Satpal and others ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND.
Present: Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.
S.D.ANAND, J.
The learned Trial Court had recorded adequate and
acceptable reasoning in ordering the restoration of the suit which had
earlier been dismissed in default. The relevant part of the discussion
appears in para 5 of the impugned order which also notices that none of
the parties entered appearance on the relevant date. From that fact, the
learned Trial Court validly drew an inference that there was misconception
in the mind of both the parties about the date of hearing. I have not been
persuaded to find any fault with the impugned order.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has a peculiar predicament
in the circumstances of the case. An appeal filed by the petitioner before
this Court against an interim order was pending consideration before the Ist
Appellate Court. As the suit itself came to be dismissed in default in the
meantime, the appeal (against the interim order) was got dismissed by the
petitioner as infructuous. The predicament envisioned by the petitioner is
that the Ist Appellate Court may not order the restoration of the appeal. It
will be for the petitioner to bring the above indicated facts to the notice of
Civil Revision No.721 of 2009 -2-
****
the learned Ist Appellate Court which shall proceed to pass an appropriate
order in accordance with law in the facts and circumstances of the case
including the fact that suit had earlier been dismissed in default, that the
appeal against the interim order was got dismissed as infructuous in view
of the dismissal of the suit in default and that the suit under reference was
thereafter ordered to be restored.
Disposed of accordingly.
February 10, 2009 (S.D.Anand) Pka Judge