JUDGMENT K.C. Agrawal and B.L. Yadav, JJ. - This appeal under order XLIII rule 1 (c) of the Code of Civil Procedure has been preferred by the plaintiff/appellant Man Mohan Modi against the rejection of his application filed under Order IX rule 9 for restoration of the suit, which was valued at Rs. 4,21,000/- . The suit was dismissed in default of the plaintiff/ appellant on 23-7-1980. The Plaintiff/appellant applied for its restoration on 25-7-1980 on the ground that as the plaintiff/appellant was arrested on 14-7-1980 at Ghaziabad, when he was informed that he was required in a murder case at Aligarh and as such he could not appear in the suit on 23-7-1980. On the application being moved, the office pointed-out several defects, which were, among others, that : 1. Restoration application has not been signed by the plaintiff/appellant ; 2 No affidavit of the plaintiff/appellant had been filed and. 3. Affidavit filed was that of one Arvind Kumar and not plaintiff/appellant. 2. The Court, after pointing out these defects, gave 7 days time to remove the defects. 3. Though these defects were subsequently removed and the fret of removal of defects finds a mention in the order-sheet dated 12-6-1980. 4. Despite the fact that all the defects had been removed the court below still chose to reject the application under order IX rule 9 CPC by holding erroneously that as the defects had not been removed, the application could not be entertained. 5. We have gone through the record and also heard Sri Santosh Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents. We are of opinion that the court below acted illegally in rejecting the application of the plaintiff/appellant made under order IX, rule 9 CPC on the ground stated above. 6. The court below did not examine the merits of the restoration application and it rejected the same on the technical ground noted above. We have ourselves examined the application as well as heard the counsel for the parties. We are satisfied that there exists sufficient ground for the restoration. The plaintiff/appellant could not appear due to the reasons beyond his control. 7. We, consequently, allow the appeal, set aside the judgment of the court below and grant the prayer made in the application for restoration by restoring the suit to its original number. The court below will decide the