1988 (1) TMI 21 - HC - Income Tax

High Court restores dismissed cases emphasizing petitioner's rights despite counsel's negligence.

The High Court allowed the restoration of Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 263 of 1985 and Miscellaneous Petition No. 191 of 1981, both dismissed for default. ... Appeals Issues involved: Application for restoration of Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 263 of 1985 and Miscellaneous Petition No. 191 of 1981 dismissed for default.Issue 1: Restoration of Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 263 of 1985The application sought restoration of a case dismissed for default where the petitioner's counsel failed to appear during the hearing. The applicant argued that the counsel's absence should not penalize the petitioner, citing the Supreme Court's decision in Rafiq v. Munshilal, AIR 1981 SC 1400. The opposing counsel contended that there was no sufficient cause for restoration. The High Court, after considering the arguments, found in favor of the applicant, emphasizing that the petitioner should not suffer due to the negligence of the counsel. The Court referred to the Supreme Court's observations regarding the parties' reliance on their advocates in the legal system, highlighting the injustice of a party suffering due to the advocate's default. The application was allowed for restoration of the case.Issue 2: Restoration of Miscellaneous Petition No. 191 of 1981The application also sought the restoration of Miscellaneous Petition No. 191 of 1981, which was dismissed for default. Following the decision on the first issue, the Court allowed the restoration of this petition as well. However, it directed that the petition be disposed of by the Central Administrative Tribunal, and the registry was instructed to transfer the case record accordingly. No costs were awarded in this matter.