In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh C.R. No. 5809 of 2008 Date of decision: July 06, 2009 Sarabjit Singh .. Appellant Vs. Amandeep Kaur and others .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Mohd. Yusuf, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Sudhir Paruthi, Advocate for the respondent No.1 and 2. Mr. R.S. Bajaj, for the respondent No.3. A.N. Jindal, J The court cannot shut the mouth of the plaintiff to claim restoration of the meritorious claim which has been dismissed in default, may be that the application for restoration was filed after a pretty long time, yet it is accompanied by a sufficient explanation to the effect that he has been living abroad and had appointed Ravinder Singh son of Jit Singh of village Kangniwal to conduct and and pursue the present suit. However, the said attorney in collusion with the respondents and did not pursue the case. Consequently, the case was dismissed in default on 18.7.2006. The said attorney also did not inform him about the progress of the case. It has also not been denied by the learned counsel for the respondents that the plaintiff had appointed another attorney on 25.4.2006 i.e. before dismissal of the suit. Certainly, the second attorney had not filed the suit and it was only Ravinder Singh who had filed the suit, therefore, the new attorney needed some time to have control of the case. In any case, the meritorious claims cannot be thrown away unheard particularly, when the plaintiff was staying abroad. He having FAO No. 5809 of 2008 -2- *** appointed attorney to file the suit was relieved of his burden, till he was informed about the disposal of the case. Since the attorney did not inform him about the dismissal of the suit, therefore, the delay in filing the application for restoration could be said to be beyond his control. As such it is a fit case to provide opportunity to plaintiff to have a fair trial. However, the respondents could be compensated with costs. Under these circumstances, this revision petition is accepted, the impugned order is set aside and the suit is restored subject to payment of Rs.15,000/- as costs. Parties are directed to appear before the trial court on 10.8.2009. July 06, 2009 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge