Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 151 , 115

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)---

----Ss.151 & 115---Application for restoration of revision petition dismissed for non prosecution---Contention of the applicant was that dismissal of the petition resulted on account of the lack of service of notice which ought to have been served and the confusion was created on account of the material fact that the case was adjourned to the first week of November, but instead it was fixed during second week of October the same year therefore, the counsel who was out of city, could not appear and the petitioner was also unable to appear on the said date-- Validity---Relevant cause list showed that the revision petition was fried wherein the name of the counsel was duly published which was a sufficient service---Counsel, about whom the applicant stated to have gone out of the city on the date fixed, had not filed any affidavit to the effect that he had not received any intimation supporting the contents of the applicant for restoration--- "Sufficient cause" for non-appearance/absence of the party as well as his counsel had to be adequately and sufficiently established within the parameters set up under the law---Revision petition was dismissed on 13-10-2000 whereas the application for restoration was filed on 2-5-2001 i. e. after the lapse of 6 months and 20 days which was extremely belated and was barred by time---No application for condonation of said delay was filed by the applicant---No sufficient cause for non -appearance of the petitioner and his counsel having at all been shown in the application no case for the restoration of revision was made out.