AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B.P. Jha, J.—This civil revision petition has been filed against an order dated 23-9-1978.
Money Suit No. 32 of 1977 was dismissed for want of payment of deficit court-fee on 8-5-1978. 8-5-1978 was the date fixed for filing the deficit court-fee amounting to Rs. 2,642/10 ps. The petitioner filed a petition for extending the date for payment of the deficit court-fee. This application was filed on 8-5-1978. This application was purported to be u/s 148, Civil P.C., (hereinafter referred to as ''file Code''). The Court below did not extend the time and dismissed the suit for default on account of non-payment of the deficit court-fee. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application under Order IX, Rule 4 read with Section 151 of the Code for restoration of Money Suit No. 32 of 1977. The Court below, by the impugned order dated 23-9-1978 refused to restore the suit on the ground that the application under Order IX, Rule 4 read with Section 151 of the Code was not maintainable:
In my opinion, the Court below erred on the occasion when the Court below refused to extend the time on 8-5-1978. The Court below also erred in not restoring the suit u/s 151 of the Code. The point raised in this case is fully covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in Mahanth Ram Das Vs. Ganga Das, . The submission of the petitioner is also supported by the Full Bench decision of this Court in Hari Lall Singh v. Jalim Singh ILR (1970) Pat 97. In a case of this type, it is not at all necessary to file a review petition under Order XLVII, Rule 1 of the Code. The Court has sufficient power to set aside such order u/s 151 of the Code. In the circumstance, I set aside the order of the Court below and restore Money Suit No. 32 of 1977 to the original place. I direct the petitioner to pay the deficit court-fee i.e. Rs. 2,642/10 Ps. within two months from today. The Court below committed an error of jurisdiction and hence I set aside the impugned order.
In the result, the petition is allowed and the order dated 23-9-1978 is set aside. Money Suit No. 32 of 1977 is restored to the original place and the petitioner is directed to pay the deficit court-fee (as mentioned above) within two mouths from today.