HIRA LAL Vs. MADAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANT Hira Lal has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing order dated 04.10.2012 (Annexure P -5) passed by the trial court. Suit filed by respondent -plaintiff Madan Lal against petitioner -defendant Hira Lal was decreed by the trial court vide ex -parte judgment and decree dated 11.10.2003 (Annexure P -1). Defendant filed application dated 25.04.2005 (Annexure P -2) under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short 'CPC') for setting -aside the ex -parte judgment and decree dated 11.10.2003 (Annexure P -1). Application dated 25.04.2005 (Annexure P -2) was dismissed in default vide order dated 01.12.2006. Defendant filed application (Annexure P -3) dated 20.03.2007 for restoration of application dated 25.04.2005 (Annexure P -2) alleging that since no effective proceedings were to take place in application dated 25.04.2005 (Annexure P -2), which was fixed for summoning of original suit file, counsel for the defendant -petitioner in the lower court had informed the petitioner that he was not required to appear in the court. However, the counsel did not intimate the petitioner about the fate of application (Annexure P -2). The petitioner on 12.03.2007 contacted his said counsel who then informed the petitioner about the dismissal of application dated 25.04.2005 (Annexure P -2) in default on 01.12.2006.

(2.) THE plaintiff by filing reply Annexure P -4 opposed the application dated 20.03.2007 (Annexure P -3) and controverted the averments made therein.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file.