A-37 & 57 % 30.09.2011 Present: Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, Mr. Aashish Gupta and Mr. Ekansh Agarwal, Advocates for the petitioner. +CM No. 18362-63/2011 (exemption) in CM(M) No. 1146/2011 CM No. 18424-25/2011 (exemption) in CM(M) No. 1156/2011 * Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. CM(M) No. 1146/2011 and CM No. 18361/2011 CM(M) No. 1156/2011 and CM No. 18423/2011 The order impugned before this court is the order dated 04.08.2011 vide which the suit which had been dismissed in default for non-appearance of the plaintiff on 25.02.2008 had been restored vide the impugned order. Present suit is a suit for possession. Issues have been framed but evidence is yet to be led. The suit had been dismissed in default on 25.02.2008; the case of the petitioner is that he learnt about this only on 26.02.2008; he had noted the wrong date which actually was 17.01.2008 but he had noted it as 18.01.2008; on 18.01.2008, he had come to know that the matter had been adjourned for 25.02.2008. The petitioner is a lawyer; he was contesting the case himself. The present application under Order 9 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been filed on 24.03.2008 i.e. within less than a month of the date of the dismissal of the suit. The impugned order had fairly and judiciously exercised its Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified discretion in favour of the plaintiff; it suffers from no infirmity. Petition is dismissed. INDERMEET KAUR, J. SEPTEMBER 30, 2011 rb