Amrik Singh & Anr vs Vipin Khanna & Ors on 17 December, 2014
Thus, in the above-said facts and circumstances, especially keeping
in mind the fact that the petitioner are NRIs, this Court is of the opinion that the
Trial Court failed to take into consideration the application for restoration in its
true perspective. The Lower Appellate Court had also taken a very technical
view for dismissing the application being not maintainable, while placing
SAILESH RANJAN
reliance upon Daya Chand Vs. Ram Phal & another AIR 1972 P&H 45. In the
2014.12.18 10:00
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CR No.3388 of 2011 -7-
said case, the second application for restoration had been heard on merits and it
had been found that there was negligence in not depositing the process fee, which
had been reversed in appeal. It was, thus, held that the order on such an
application was not appealable.