The Respondent then moved an application under Order 14 Rule 19 of the CPC for restoration of the appeal but the same was dismissed on 14.4.1981.
The Respondent then filed an appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 C.P.C. read with Section 104 challenging the companyrectness of the order dated 14.4.1981.
An objection was raised with regard to the maintainability of the said Letters Patent Appeal but the Division Bench came to the companyclusion that the letters patent appeal was maintainable and, on merits, it set aside the order of the companyrt below and restored the appeal of the Respondent before the Subordinate Judge.
The Respondent had filed a suit for declaration of title and companyfirmation of possession and in the alternative for recovery of possession.
The appeal filed against the said suit, thereafter, was dismissed in default on 9.5.1980 by the Subordinate Judge due to number appearance of the Counsel for the Respondent.
The suit was dismissed by the Munsiffs Court on 12.12.1977.
A Letters Patent Appeal was filed whereby the order of 1.2.1983 of the learned Single Judge was sought to be challenged.
This appeal was dismissed vide judgment dated 1.2.83.
