In a restoration application filed under Order 41 Rule 11 CPC, the Patna High Court allowed the petition for restoration of Second Appeal No. 106 of 2008 which was dismissed for default, finding sufficient cause prevented the petitioner from appearing.
The restoration application is allowed and Second Appeal No. 106 of 2008 is restored to its original file.
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.
Patna High Court MJC No.4822 of 2012 (4) dt.06-02-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.4822 of 2012
| ====================================================== Md. Mujim Nadaf .... .... Petitioner/s Versus Hamid Nadaf & Ors. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== |
|
|---|---|
Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vaidehi Raman Prasad Sing For the Respondent/s : Mr. |
|
| ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR SAHOO ORAL ORDER |
|
| 4 | 06-02-2013 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. |
| This restoration application has been filed by the | |
| petitioner for restoration of Second Appeal No.106 of 2008 which was dismissed for default on 12.09.2012 as nobody appeared on |
|
| behalf of the appellant when the Second Appeal was called on for hearing under Order 41 Rule 11 C.P.C. |
|
| In view of the explanation given in the restoration | |
| application, I am satisfied that the petitioner was prevented by | |
| sufficient cause from not appearing before the court when the | |
| Second Appeal was called on for hearing under Order 41 Rule 11 | |
| C.P.C. Accordingly, this restoration application is allowed. The | |
| Second Appeal No.106 of 2008 is restored to its original file. |
(Mungeshwar Sahoo, J)
Saurabh/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing for the hearing of the Second Appeal.
Whether the application for restoration of the dismissed Second Appeal should be allowed.
Whether the Second Appeal should be restored to the original file.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Md. Mujim Nadaf
Hamid Nadaf
Mungeshwar Sahoo
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
