ANIL KUMAR JHA Vs. LT GOVERNOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CM Nos. 6742/08 (restoration) and 6744/08 (condonation of delay)1. This application (CM No. 6742/08) has been made by the petitioner under Order 9 Rule 8 read with Section 151 CPC for restoration of the Civil revision coupled with an application (CM No. 6744/08) under Section 5 of limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the application.

(2.) IT is stated in the application that the matter was ordered to be fixed in the category of 'senior Citizens' by this Court on 11th May, 2006. Thereafter, the petitioner could not keep track of the case. File of the case remained with him, so the counsel also could not keep track of the case. The petitioner never expected that the case would be listed so soon. He had no facilities of internet. His counsel has also no facilities of internet or getting the daily cause list of the Court. The petitioner went to his hometown in Kerala. He learnt about the dismissal of the Revision on 25th March, 2008 when bailiff came with warrants of possession and he was astonished that the revision was dismissed on 18th May, 2006 on account of non-appearance by this court. Same grounds have been taken in the application under Section 5 of limitation Act for condonation of delay.

(3.) A perusal of record shows that the petition was admitted on 18th september, 2002. Thereafter, an application for early hearing was made by the respondent which was dismissed by the Court. However, the Court gave directions in presence of the counsel for the petitioner on 11th May, 2006 that the matter be fixed in the category of 'senior Citizens'. It is a matter of common knowledge as per the policy of the High Court which is known to every Advocate that 'senior Citizens' matters are taken up on every Thursday according to their seniority. It was obligatory on the part of the petitioner and his counsel to look into the cause list of 'senior Citizens' case which are listed on every thursday. The excuse taken by the petitioner that he had no facility of internet and his counsel had also no facility of internet and was not getting the cause list of the High Court is not tenable.