Back
REKHA BORANA
Shakuntala W/o Shri Khemraj – Appellant
Versus
Pallavi W/o Shri Akash – Respondent
ORDER
The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 01.10.2024 passed by Additional District Judge No.4, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Civil Misc. Case No.125/2021 whereby the application under Order 9 Rule 9 read with Section 151, CPC and Section 5 of the Limitation Act as filed on behalf of the plaintiffs was dismissed.
2. The application was filed on behalf of the plaintiffs with three averments: firstly, they had not received back their file from counsel Mr. Naveen Bhandari; secondly, they had never instructed counsel Mr. Dharmendra Surana to appear on their behalf; and thirdly, they were not aware of order dated 11.10.2019 as they did not reside in Jodhpur and did not travel to Jodhpur frequently.
3. The learned Trial Court while rejecting the application found all the three grounds as raised by the plaintiffs to be not tenable.
4. The learned Trial Court specifically observed that firstly, none of the lawyers on whom the allegation was levelled by the plaintiffs had been impleaded. Secondly, no fact or document whatsoever was placed on record to show that any complaint was filed or any action against the said lawyers was taken by the plaintiffs. Thirdly, it is the same
Restoration of suit dismissed for default – A party cannot be permitted to blame Lawyers for his/her negligence without there being any proof of same.
Litigants must remain vigilant about their legal proceedings and cannot solely blame their counsel for lack of information; failure to show reasonable cause for delay in seeking relief results in rej....
Negligence of counsel does not excuse a party from the consequences of failing to participate in legal proceedings, emphasizing accountability in legal representation.
Irregularity in service of summons does not justify setting aside an ex parte decree if the defendant had knowledge of the proceedings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of 'sufficient cause' for non-appearance under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC and the requirement for the party to approach the court with ....
The legal aid system must ensure effective representation for vulnerable individuals, and lapses by legal counsel should not penalize the complainant.
A lawyer does not breach fiduciary duty when advising clients to file a new suit based on new facts rather than amending an existing suit, provided the new facts constitute a separate cause of action....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
