How far a mistake committed by a lawyer can be regarded as a "sufficient cause" within the meaning of section 5 of the Limitation Act is the ever important and long debated question posed in this petition for condonation of delay in filing an application under section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code by which a judgment and decree of the learned Munsiff No. 1, North Lakhimpur dated 30.1.82 has been challenged.

2. The lawyers are supposed to be legal experts; but they too like every human-being are prone to err. But a litigant can legitimately lean on the professional advice. Here the peti­tioners sent papers (perhaps with all material instructions) to approach this Court against the aforesaid judgment and decree. Shri A. Bari, an old and respected lawyer, thought that no revision might lie and so he invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court by filing a petition under Article 226 of the Cons­titution of India on 12.5.82. That application was dismissed in limine on 17.5.82. The learned counsel then detected from the records of the suit "that it was a suit under section 5 of the Specific Relief Act, against which a revision lies" and so he filed this application on 20.5.82, by which d

Click Here to Read the rest of this document