Asit Kumar Bisi, J - (1.) The Learned Advocates for the p ies are present. By the application being G.A. No. 946 of 2002 which is evidently under Order 9 of Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Code the applicant has sought condonation of delay and recalling of the order of setting aside the ex parte decree passed on 14th September, 2000 in Suit No. 305 of 1999 and restoration of suit No. 305 of 1999 to its original file and number. It has been alleged, inter alia, in the said application that on 28.7.99 the written statement was prepared and signed and due instruction was given to Sri Aniruddha Das Gupta who was the Advocate-on-record for defendant No. 1, presently the applicant for filling the same and the said Advocate categorically assured the applicant by accepting power that he would take all required steps to protect the interest of the applicant in the said suit. It has been further alleged that the Writ of Summons was issued on 25.6.99 allowing 35 days to file the written statement and the Advocate who was engaged for preparing the written statement assured the applicant that he would take steps and would file the written statement in the presence of the applicant before this Court. The applicant from time to time had been keeping close contact with the said Advocate Mr. Aniruddha Das Gupta who used to assure that nothing had come out to the detriment of the applicant. On 31.01.2002 the applicant contacted the said Advocate who told him that some orders had been passed in the above suit but the contents were unknown to the applicant. Subsequently on 21.02.2002 the applicant engaged another Advocate after obtaining change from Mr. Anirudha Das Gupta for inspection of the records and the applicant applied to get copy of the order and other informations and obtained the certified copy of the decree wherefrom he came to know that the decree was passed ex parte.
(2.) Hence the present application has been filed by the applicant praying for condonation of delay and recalling of the ex parte decree passed in the said suit.
(3.) The plaintiff/opposite party has filed an affidavit-in-opposition to the said application wherein the material averments contained in the application have been disputed and denied.;