Civil Revision Court dismissed the petition asking to set aside the order dismissing a restoration petition. The Court held that appellants were negligent and reckless in pursuing their appeal, leading to dismissal after multiple defaults, and thus the restoration petition was not bona fide.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL REVISION No.127 of 2016
======================================================
All resident of village Aspura, P.S./ Bikram, District Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
All resident of village Aspura, PS Bikram, District Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Usha Rai For the Respondent/s : Mr. ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 15-04-2019
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Patna High Court C.R. No.127 of 2016 dt.15-04-2019 2/4
before the District Judge, Patna, against the judgment and decree dated 30.11.1987 passed in T.S. No. 95 of 1979 / 59 of 1987 by Sub-Judge-VII, Patna. The appeal was transferred in the FTC-V, Patna. It has been submitted that after creation of court of Additional District Judge, Danapur, Title Appeal No. 21 of 1988 was transferred to the court of Additional District Judge, Danapur, vide memo dated 07.09.2009, by which order of District Judge, Patna, and the same was received in the office of Additional District Judge, Danapur, on 09.11.2009 and date was fixed for hearing of the appeal on 19.02.2010. No notice was issued to petitioners (appellants) with respect to fixing of date of hearing of appeal, as such they could not appear in the appeal. Petitioner thereafter became ill and after recovery contacted his lawyer in December-2010 who inform him that appeal has been transferred to the Court of Danapur, as such he is not aware regarding status of appeal and thereafter he went to Civil Court, Danapur, but could not succeed in getting information about the Title Appeal and thereafter filed information petition on 17.08.2012, and was informed that appeal stood dismissed for default on 16.03.2011 and thereafter he inspected the record on 26.09.2012. Petitioner thereafter filed a miscellaneous case for restoration of Miscellaneous Case No.
Patna High Court C.R. No.127 of 2016 dt.15-04-2019 3/4
14 of 2012 / Trial No. 02 of 2014, in which notices were sent to opposite parties and they had appeared.
Patna High Court C.R. No.127 of 2016 dt.15-04-2019
4/4
25.03.2015 and have also not produced any witness in the miscellaneous case and as such dismissed the miscellaneous case against which present revision has been filed.
(S. Kumar, J)
ranjan/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | N.A. |
| Uploading Date | 29.04.19 |
| Transmission Date | N.A. |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order dismissing the petition for restoration of appeal for non-attendance was illegal, irregular or erroneous.
Whether the petitioners acted bona fide in seeking restoration after previous dismissals for default.
Madan Singh @ Madandhari Sharma & Others
Arjun Sao & Others
S. Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
