AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
G.C. Mital, J.
The defendants filed written statement but did not pay the conditional costs. On nonpayment of conditional costs their defence was struck off.
The defendants filed an application for recalling the order striking off defence on the grounds stated in the application. That application has been dismissed by the trial Court vide order dated 26.4.1989 merely on the ground that the application is not sustainable and only revision would lie to the High Court. One of the defendants has come to this Court in revision.
On a consideration of the matter, I am of the view that the Court below failed to exercise its jurisdiction while passing the impugned order. The defendants could show sufficient cause for nonpayment of the costs and if the trial Court was satisfied, it had the jurisdiction to recall the order striking off defence.
It will be open to the defendants to lead evidence in rebuttal to the evidence led by the plaintiff in support of the application and the trial Court would decide the matter on merits in accordance with the law.
Accordingly, the revision is allowed, the order of the trial Court dated 25.4.1989 is set aside with a direction to it to decide the application of defendants on merit in accordance with law. The parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the trial Court on 25.1.1991. No costs.