The Delhi High Court has clarified that while courts often hold that a litigant should not be made to suffer for their lawyer’s negligence, this notion is not an inflexible principle. Justice Girish Kathpalia underlined that each case must be decided on its specific facts and context, because otherwise, any failure can be attributed to prior counsel indefinitely.
The case before the Court involved a petitioner seeking condonation of a six-year delay in the filing of a written statement in a suit filed against him. The petitioner's argument rested on the claim that his previous counsel had failed to file the written statement within the stipulated time, and that he should not suffer for that failure. However, the High Court rejected this plea.
The Court observed that the petitioner had been served summons in 2019, which clearly informed him in both English and Hindi that a written statement had to be filed within 30 days. This notice was admitted to have been received by the petitioner, indicating that he was aware or at least could not deny knowledge of the need to file within the prescribed period. The petitioner also provided no information regarding when he recognized his default.
Further, the Court noted that after receiving summons, the petitioner had managed to file an application for rejection of the plaint. This demonstrated that he was both aware of the proceedings and capable of filing pleadings, undermining his assertion of total helplessness or ignorance regarding the filing of the written statement.
Given these facts, the Court held that there was no justification for extending leniency by condoning the delay. The trial court’s order, which had closed the petitioner’s right to file the written statement, was upheld.
Thus, the judgment reinforces that litigants cannot always be excused from consequences stemming from their counsel’s oversights or misconduct. Each case must be scrutinized in its entirety, ensuring that procedural fairness does not turn into blanket protection when a litigant has had clear notice, adequate opportunity, or other means to act.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.