Civil Revision No.721 of 2009 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.721 of 2009 Date of decision: 10.2.2009 Subhash ...Petitioner Versus Satpal and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. Present: Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. S.D.ANAND, J. The learned Trial Court had recorded adequate and acceptable reasoning in ordering the restoration of the suit which had earlier been dismissed in default. The relevant part of the discussion appears in para 5 of the impugned order which also notices that none of the parties entered appearance on the relevant date. From that fact, the learned Trial Court validly drew an inference that there was misconception in the mind of both the parties about the date of hearing. I have not been persuaded to find any fault with the impugned order. Learned counsel for the petitioner has a peculiar predicament in the circumstances of the case. An appeal filed by the petitioner before this Court against an interim order was pending consideration before the Ist Appellate Court. As the suit itself came to be dismissed in default in the meantime, the appeal (against the interim order) was got dismissed by the petitioner as infructuous. The predicament envisioned by the petitioner is that the Ist Appellate Court may not order the restoration of the appeal. It will be for the petitioner to bring the above indicated facts to the notice of Civil Revision No.721 of 2009 -2- **** the learned Ist Appellate Court which shall proceed to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law in the facts and circumstances of the case including the fact that suit had earlier been dismissed in default, that the appeal against the interim order was got dismissed as infructuous in view of the dismissal of the suit in default and that the suit under reference was thereafter ordered to be restored. Disposed of accordingly. February 10, 2009 (S.D.Anand) Pka Judge