BABU LAL ALIAS MITHAN LAL Vs. SUKH RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A typical reckless negligence of non filing of written statement for 15 months, after about a dozen adjournments including three with costs resulting in ex-parte proceedings, and yet invoking, revisional jurisdiction to put premium on such lethargy, inaction and negligence by making the counsel scrap goat for setting aside ex-parte order, is the extraordinary prayer in this petition under section 115 C. P. C. and now the facts:

(2.) A suit for ejectment was filed by the plaintiff The defendant who is the petitioner before this Court put up appearance on February 11,1980, through Mr. P. Gadaria and prayed for time to file the written statement.

(3.) MR. Keshot invited my attention to the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Rafiq vs. Munshilal (1), in which the following observations were made : "where an appeal filed by the appellant was disposed of in absence of his counsel, so also his application for recall of order of dismissal was rejected by the High Court, the Supreme Court in appeal set aside both the orders of dismissal on ground that a party who, as per the present adversary legal system, has selected his advocate, briefed him and paid his fee can remain supremely confident that his lawyer will look after his interest and such a innocent party who has done everything in his power and expected of him, should not suffer for the inaction, deliberate omission or misdemeanour of his counsel. "