ALONGWITH v. Jasbir Singh Vasan & Ors.
Judgment
Cause title
Mr. U. J. Makhija i/b. M/s. Bagla Dandekar & Co. for the Appellant. Mr. G. S. Bhatt for the Respondents. ....
CORAM : D. K. DESHMUKH AND SMT. R. P. SONDURBALDOTA, JJ. DATED : JULY 29, 2010. P.C. By consent of the parties the Appeal is taken up for hearing.
2. By order which is impugned in the Appeal what has been 2 apeal35-10 done by the learned Single Judge is not only the order dated 4th December, 2008 has been set aside, but even Notice of Motion No. 558 of 2006 which was for restoration of the Suit has also been disposed of. In our opinion, even accepting that the learned Judge was justified in granting the Review Petition, then at the mosts he could have restored the Notice of Motion No. 558 of 2006 to file, so that Notice of Motion could be heard on merit.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the Review Petition could not have been allowed by the learned Single Judge. In our opinion, it is not necessary for us to go into that question because the consequence of allowing the Review Petition is that the Notice of Motion taken out by the plaintiff for restoration of the Suit which has been dismissed for default is being ordered to be heard on merit. In our opinion, it will not be proper to set aside an order which merely gives an opportunity of hearing to the plaintiff to urge that his suit should be restored. In our opinion, therefore, following will meet the ends of justice. ::
O R D E R ::
i. The order of the learned Single Judge allowing 3 apeal35-10 the Review Petition and setting aside order dated 4th December, 2008, passed in Notice of Motion No. 558 of 2006, is maintained. ii. Rests of the order passed by the learned Single Judge is set aside. Notice of Motion No. 558 of 2006 is restored to the file. Office is directed to place the Notice of Motion No. 558 of 2006 for hearing before the appropriate Court. iii. All the contentions available for both the sides are kept open. iv. Appeal and Notice of Motion are, accordingly, disposed of. SMT. R. P. SONDURBALDOTA, J. D. K. DESHMUKH, J.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.