ANIL SONABA JAGDALE Vs. MANEKBAI M. GOPALJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above Interim Application is filed to condone the delay and to set aside the order dtd. 6/1/2017, under which the above Suit was dismissed for want of prosecution. The above Application is lodged on 13/9/2021. There is a delay of approximately 4 years and 7 months [approximately 1,674 days]. The reason I have mentioned this over here, is because in the Interim Application, the period of delay is not mentioned anywhere.

(2.) It appears that when the above Suit was called out on 6/1/2017, none appeared on behalf of the Plaintiff. In these circumstances, this Court by its order dtd. 6/1/2017 dismissed the Suit for want of prosecution. To set aside this order, the present Interim Application is lodged on 13/9/2021.

(3.) The explanation for non-appearance on 6/1/2017 as well as for the delay in filing the present Application, is set out in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 thereof. In the Interim Application it is stated that in the year 2010, amendments to the Plaint were allowed and thereafter the matter was adjourned for framing issues. However, after January 2011, the Suit was not appearing on board for framing issues for a long period of time and it is for this reason that the advocate for the Plaintiff did not keep track of the matter. In these circumstances, when the matter came up on 6/1/2017, the advocate for the Applicant was absent and the Suit was dismissed for want of prosecution. It is thereafter stated that after the amendments were allowed [in 2010], the Applicant was in regular touch with his advocate but since the matter was not appearing on board for a long period of time, the Applicant was under a bona fide impression that as and when the matter is listed, issues would be framed, and his advocate would inform him accordingly. It is thereafter stated that the Applicant was unaware of the Suit being listed on 6/1/2017 and came to know about the dismissal order only on 31/8/2021, i.e. when he visited the office of his advocate and enquired about the Suit. It is also stated that because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Applicant could not communicate with his advocate and was under a bona fide impression that the Court is not working and therefore there was no occasion for the Applicant to communicate with his advocate and enquire about the status of the above Suit.