Horil Chaudhary v. Mahendra Chaudhary
Restoration of appeal dismissed in default – sufficient cause – Order 41 Rule 19 of the Code
Case brief
What is this about?
Patna High Court, Miscellaneous Appeal No.883 of 2019, decided 23-06-2025 by Justice Ramesh Chand Malviya (oral order). Horil Chaudhary v. Mahendra Chaudhary and 9 others. Appeal against order dated 21.09.2019 of Additional District and Session Judge 4th, Siwan in M.A. Case No. 02 of 2017 refusing to restore Title Appeal No. 99 of 2014, dismissed due to non-prosecution after transfer of record on 18.04.2015 without notice to the appellant. Held: recall application constituted sufficient cause under Order 41 Rule 19 of the Code; first appeal is a valuable right; dismissal in default dispreferred to dismissal after hearing. Appeal allowed; impugned order set aside; Title Appeal No. 99 of 2014 readmitted for hearing on merits subject to costs of Rs 5,000 to the respondent; appellate hearing to be uninfluenced by High Court's observations. Cases applied: Sarwan Singh v. Kishan Singh (dead) through L.Rs., BBCJ 2008(1) iv-126; Commissioner Mysore Urban Development Authority v. S.S. Sarvesh, (2019) 5 SCC 144; State Bank of India v. Taril Appliances & Equipment Pvt. Ltd., AIR 2006 Cal. 121; Annasaheb Virupakasha Bride v. Dada Tatoba Patel, 2005 SCC OnLine Bom 17.