- (1.) Challenge in this writ petition is to the order dated 26th July, 2008 whereby the learned Rent Tribunal, Alwar dismissed the application of the petitioner-applicant filed under Order 9 of CPC.
(2.) Having considered the submissions made at the bar and carefully perused the relevant material on record including the impugned order, it is noticed that a suit for eviction was pending before the Rent Tribunal, Alwar which stood dismissed on 7th August, 2006, in default and non-appearance of the petitioner-applicant. The petitioner-applicant filed an application under Order 9 Rule 4 of CPC along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act before the learned Rent Tribunal imploring to restore the application for eviction to its original number, as the counsel for the applicant was engaged in some another case, in another Court and could not attend this case on the said date. This application was dismissed by the learned Tribunal on the ground that not only the applicant-petitioner or his counsel did not appear in the Court on 7th August, 2006 but he filed the application for restoration after nine months and the petitioner utterly failed to explain the delay as to why the application for restoration of main application was not filed in time.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner canvassed that the petitioner is a landlord and it is he, who filed the suit for eviction. If the main application is not restored, he shall be deprived of seeking justice from the Court, hence, in the interest of justice, one opportunity may be granted to the petitioner to prosecute the suit.;