TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court overturns dismissal due to absent counsel, restores appeal for fair hearing. Advocate fined Rs.200.</h1> <h3>Rafiq and another Versus Munshilal and another</h3> The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order dismissing the appeal due to the absence of the appellant's counsel, and directed ... Innocent party should not suffer for the inaction, deliberate omission, or mis-demeanour of his counsel Issues:1. Appeal dismissed in absence of appellant's counsel.2. Application to recall the order.3. Responsibility of parties in the legal system.4. Practice of lawyers remaining absent in court.5. Party suffering due to advocate's default.6. Restoration of appeal and costs.Analysis:The judgment addresses the issue where the High Court dismissed the appellant's appeal in the absence of their counsel. The appellant, upon realizing the dismissal, filed an application to recall the order and participate in the hearing. The High Court rejected the application citing delay in submission. The Supreme Court highlighted the obligation of parties in the legal system to trust their advocates and not be required to personally oversee court proceedings. The Court emphasized that a party should not suffer due to the advocate's default.Regarding the practice of lawyers remaining absent in court, the Court expressed concern over such behavior potentially leading to injustice. The judgment questioned whether it is fair for a party to suffer due to the actions or inaction of their chosen advocate. The Court acknowledged the lack of evidence regarding the advocate's deliberate absence but emphasized that the innocent party should not face injustice as a result.As a resolution, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, and directed the restoration of the appeal for proper disposal. The Court also addressed the issue of costs, deciding that the advocate who was absent should bear the costs amounting to Rs.200. The right to execute the cost order was reserved with the party represented by the respondent's counsel.In conclusion, the appeal was allowed with costs imposed on the absent advocate. The judgment serves as a reminder of the responsibility of advocates and the importance of ensuring that parties do not suffer due to the actions of their legal representatives.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
