IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Civil Revision No.12 of 2009. Date of decision: 09.03.2009. Kanshi Ram & Others …Petitioners Versus Punjab National Bank …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Dev Darshan Sud,J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 No. For the Petitioners: Mr.Romesh Verma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr.Ajay Kumar, Advocate. Dev Darshan Sud,J. This petition has been preferred against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Shimla, on an application under Order 9 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, preferred by the respondent-bank praying for restoration of the suit filed by it, which has been dismissed for default. Learned Court below on the evidence before it, held that there was sufficient cause for restoration of the suit and that there was no delay, though, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has urged with vehemence that the application for restoration was filed after more than a year. 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgement? Yes. 2 I do not find any error of jurisdiction which has been committed by the learned Court below, which would call for my interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. This application is accordingly disposed of with a direction that the respondents shall pay costs of Rs.4,400/- to the petitioners herein on the first date of appearance before the learned trial Court. This shall be in addition to the costs of Rs.600/- already imposed by the learned trial Court. This petition is accordingly disposed of. It is clarified that in case such costs are not paid on the first date of appearance, the order passed by the trial Court restoring the suit to its original number shall stand vacated and this petition accepted. Parties to appear before the learned trial Court on 30.3.2009. March 9, 2009 (Dev Darshan Sud) (aks) Judge.