(1.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated 17.06.2017, passed by learned Civil Judge, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P., whereby two applications having been filed by the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the 'plaintiff') under Order 9 Rule 4 Civil Procedure Code and under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of delay in filing the application under Order 9 Rule 4 CPC, came to be dismissed, plaintiff has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, praying therein to quash and set aside the aforesaid order and to allow the application for setting aside the order of "dismissed in default" after condoning the delay and decide the suit on merits.
(2.) Having heard learned counsel representing the parties and perused the material available on record vis-a- vis reasoning assigned by the learned Court below while passing the impugned order, this Court finds that suit for declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction having been filed by the plaintiff was fixed for hearing on 2.12.2015. Since on 2.12.2015, none appeared on behalf of the plaintiff in the learned Court below, her suit was dismissed in default for non prosecution and non-appearance.
(3.) Plaintiff with a view to get the order of "dismissed in default" passed against her quashed and set- aside, preferred an application under Order 9 Rule 4 Civil Procedure Code (available at Page 23 of the paper book) after delay of more than two months i.e. somewhere in March, 2016. Since prescribed period for moving application for getting the ex- parte order set-aside had expired, plaintiff also preferred an application under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act ( available at Page 28 of the paper book), praying therein for condonation of delay in moving the application under Order 9 Rule 4 CPC. Learned Court below vide common order dated 17.6.2017, dismissed both the applications. In the aforesaid background, plaintiff has approached this Court in the instant proceedings.