Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 13,3

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. IX, r. 13-Provisions applicable to proceedings in suit arising out of award made by Arbitrators.   Roshan Lal Marwari and others v. Firm of Bridhi Chan Sri Lal A I R 1924 Pat. 603 distinguished.   Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. IX, r. 13 & O. XVII, r. 3--Whether provisions of O. IX, r. 13 applicable in case covered by D. XVII, r. 3 (Quaere).   Civil Procedure, Code (V of 1908), O. XVII, r. 3 Provisions of rule 3 contemplate, not general but special adjourn ment, for some reasons-Case adjourned not at instance of any party but because of preoccupation of Court-Adjournment cannot be said-to have been made under O. XVIL r. 3.    JUDGMENT   K. M. HASAN, J.-This appeal is directed against the judgment and order rejecting the appellant's application under Order IX, rule 13, of the Code of Civil Procedure for restoration of the suit to file after- setting aside the ex parte decree.   The ex parte decree was passed on 19-5-62 and the application under Order IX, rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed on 16-6-62, stating inter alia that Md. Tasiruddin Shah, Managing partner of the firm of the petitioner had been all along making tadbir in the suit; that the said Tadbirkar Md. Tasiruddin Shah went to Rangpur town for his personal business where he fell ill on 16-5-62, of severe pain over the Inguinal Hernia and also pain in fistulatinano; that he was examined by the Medical Officer, Government Hospital, Rangpur, on 17-5-62, and was advised complete rest for a week; that the said Tadbirkar being an old man and ill totally forgot to send instruction to his lawyer and accordingly the defendant could not be present oil the date of hearing of the suit. Along with the application a certificate granted by the doctor Ashak Ali M. B. was attached which supported the case of the petitioner.   As against that the decree-holder filed objection challenging the statements in the application for restoration of the suit. When the matter came up for hearing Md. Tasiruddin Shah examined himself on behalf of the petitioner and none was examined on behalf of the decree-holder. The learned…