Hanuman vs Mamta Gaur And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 14381 P&H

Civil Revision No.4984 of 2022                              -1-


        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH


                           Civil Revision No.4984 of 2022
                           Date of Decision:-15.11.2022

Hanuman

                                                     ...Petitioner

                           Versus

Mamta Gaur and others

                                                     ...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

Present:- Mr. J.P. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

NIDHI GUPTA J.(Oral)

Prayer in this petition is for setting aside the impugned order

dated 15.7.2022 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Additional District Judge,

Narnaul vide which the application for restoration dated 10.4.2017

(Annexure P-2) has been dismissed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

had filed an appeal before the learned Additional District Judge, Narnaul

on 28.8.2015 against the judgment and decree dated 31.3.2015 passed by

the Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) Narnaul, vide which the suit for declaration and

permanent injunction filed by the present petitioner/plaintiff was dismissed.

Learned counsel further submits that due to lack of communication between

the petitioner and his counsel before the first Appellate Court, the requisite

process fee and costs of Rs.500/- as was ordered on 07.12.2016 (Annexure

1 of 3

P-3), could not be deposited. He submits that on 10.3.2017 due to non-

appearance of the counsel as well as the petitioner before the Appellate

Court, the appeal was ordered to be dismissed in default.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that because the

counsel for the petitioner/appellant was busy in another Court at Narnaul

and the appellant was ill on that date and even there was no communication

in between them, the appeal remained unrepresented and consequently

dismissed in default.

Thereafter, the petitioner/appellant filed an application for

restoration of the said appeal on 10.4.2017 (Annexure P-2) but the same

was also dismissed vide impugned order dated 15.7.2022.

Now, to clear that part, learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that the application dated 10.4.2017 was filed by another counsel

and due to lack of communication between the previous counsel and the

new counsel, the order regarding depositing of costs was not communicated

to the new counsel by the previous one, resulting into dismissal of the

application dated 10.4.2017.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that consequences of

lack of communication between two counsel should not be suffered by the

petitioner and therefore prays that this revision petition be allowed and the

application dated 10.4.2017 after restoration may be allowed, even subject

to payment of costs.

Since the prayer is limited, therefore, the petition stands

allowed. The order dated 15.7.2022 (Annexure P-1) dismissing the

2 of 3

application for restoration is set aside and the application dated 10.4.2017

after restoring is ordered to be allowed and the Civil Appeal No.477 of

2015, instituted on 28.8.2015, titled 'Hanuman vs. Smt. Mamta Gaur and

others' is ordered to be restored to its original number, subject to payment

of costs of Rs.10,000/-.

November 15, 2022                           ( NIDHI GUPTA )
Vijay Asija                                      JUDGE


Whether speaking/reasoned                 Yes / No
Whether Reportable                        Yes / No




                                 3 of 3