IN THE vHON‘BLE HIGH CQURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR. xa No. 4f Zr) OF 2004 APPELLANE : M/s. Central Gas Agencies JUDGwEm Through — Shaukat Ali son of BEBTER M. F. Ali, Dixit Colony Kosana’la, Bhilai, Tah. & Distt. Durg (C.G.) VERS US RESPONDENT : M/s. Papusa Gases Priva te Limited DE CREE HOLDER Registered O£fice at J.K. Timber, Main Road, Korba Tah. & District Korba, through— Its Director. 1 OF CIVIL PROCED '”“ CODE. MISC. APPEAL UNDER ORDER 43 RULE no /{ i \ . .‘V‘M . Nc‘ 4:9’? WW mzoglf mm (Wu) anéwmw WWW mmm $w‘fmm 3.3. Hon'ble $hri Justice N.K. A a ai 1 9-03-201 o Shri MK. Bhaduri, counse! fort e appeiiant. Heard on admission. Feeling aggrieved by the orde dated 14-01—2004 passed by Second Add]. District Judge, F.T.C.), Korba in M.J.C. No.03/2003 whereby and whereunder the appiication preferred by the appeiiant under Order 9 Rule 13 of C.P.C. has been dismissed, instant appeai has been pr ferred. Facts briefly stated are as und : The respondent as decree hoi er instituted a suit against the appeiiant/judgment debtor in the ear 1999. Admittedly, the summons of suit were received by the appeiiant on 09-06-1 999 for his‘appe’arance in the Court on 27-07 1999. instead of appearing in the case either personaiiy or thro gh his counsei, he sent a telegram showing his inability to appe r in the case on the date of hearing. The trial Court proceeded e -parte against the appellant and after a iapse of more than 3 year passed the ex-parte decree on 16-07-2002. The appellant prefer d an application for setting aside the ex—partedecree under 0rd 9 Rule 13 of the C.P.C. on 24-09-2003 which was dismissed by the Court below vide order impugned. Learned counsel for the app llant would submit that the appeliant could not appear in the ourt due to his illness and thereafter, when he received the no ice in execution case,.then mm #1200 ‘7 WWW (W) ”WWW . Wwwwm ' mmm We preférred’the applicatién. The ie*‘med Court below has erred in dismissing the application. i have heard learned counseif r the appeiiant and perused the order impugned. Undisputedly, after receipt of summons in the suit, the appellant-did not appear in the case and sent a teiegram to the Court informing about his illness. He neither engaged any mmm mmw ' éoiinsel ner even appeared in the c se for a considerable long period of 4 years. Thereafter, on he ground of absence of knowledge regarding ex—paite proc edings, he preferred the application for setting aside the ex'pa decree. On the face, the appellant appears to be grossly neglig nt in prosecuting his case. for his non-appearance in ln View of above, l do not fin any illegality in the order Passed by the Court below warranting terferenceof this Court. For the foregoing, the appeal b ing devoid of substance is iable to be and is hereby dismissed at otion state. y N’K. AGARWAL We date im ,l tieraiwi'nt ~«FSM‘I‘2/2mo —1 ,oo,ooo. a