The High Court dismissed an appeal against the Trial Court’s order rejecting a petition to restore a file. The Court found the petitioner negligent for failing to pay process fees and appearing despite multiple adjournments.
The appeal filed under Order 43 Rule 1(c) CPC was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC:46273 MFA No. 1799 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1799 OF 2024 (CPC)
BETWEEN:
M/S AEGIS LOGISTICS LIMITED HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 12020 TOWER B PENNINSULA BUSINESS PARK, G K MARG LOWER PAREL (WEST), MUMBAI - 400013 REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL SALES MANAGER, SOUTH ZONE AND AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, MR ARVIND GUPTA.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. ASHWIN. R.ANEPPANAVAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
…RESPONDENTS
THIS MFA IS FILED U/O.43 RULE 1(c) OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DT.18.01.2024 PASSED IN MISC. NO.25051/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE LVII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYO HALL UNIT, BENGALURU, (CCH-58), DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED U/O.9 RULE 9 OF CPC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Heard appellant’s counsel.
this Miscellaneous Petition upon Miscellaneous Petition has also taken note of Ex.P-3, which reflects that the earlier Mis.No.25069/2021 came to be registered on 04.08.2021 and since then the case has been adjourned for issuance of notice to the respondents on several occasions i.e., on 07.12.2021, 08.02.2022 and 17.02.2022. Even before dismissal also, on 17.02.2022 there was no representation and the matter was kept by for furnishing process fee and once again there was no representation. The matter was ordered to be kept on the same day and was repeatedly called out in the afternoon session, but there was no representation and from the beginning of filing of Miscellaneous Petition also, the appellant has not paid process fee and has also not furnished copies. Taking note of Ex.P-3, order sheet, which discloses that the petitioner was not diligent, the Trial Court came to the conclusion that no reasonable grounds are made out to restore the Miscellaneous Petition while dismissing the Miscellaneous Petition by passing the impugned order.
5. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Sd/(H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE
BMC
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can restore a miscellaneous petition dismissed by the Trial Court due to the petitioner's negligence and non-payment of process fees.
Whether there are sufficient grounds to set aside the Trial Court’s order dismissing the Miscellaneous Petition upon Miscellaneous Petition.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s Aegis Logistics Limited
Mr. Chuna Rafi Ahmed
M/s ABN Autogas
H.P. Sandesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
