https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17893 A High Court may recall dismissal orders in restoration matters only where the applicant shows sufficient cause and due diligence. Here, persistent default in appearance and compliance- including no vakalatnama for junior counsel, failure to pay process fee, supply copies, file annexures, or take other directed steps- showed negligence rather than a bona fide lapse. The explanation that senior counsel was abroad did not account for the repeated omissions or the prolonged inaction in connected matters. Emphasising finality in proceedings, the Court held that its inherent power to recall could not be used to excuse gross negligence, and the restoration applications were rejected for want of sufficient cause. en-us Sat, 21 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Sep 2009 14:09:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17893 A High Court may recall dismissal orders in restoration matters only where the applicant shows sufficient cause and due diligence. Here, persistent default in appearance and compliance- including no vakalatnama for junior counsel, failure to pay process fee, supply copies, file annexures, or take other directed steps- showed negligence rather than a bona fide lapse. The explanation that senior counsel was abroad did not account for the repeated omissions or the prolonged inaction in connected matters. Emphasising finality in proceedings, the Court held that its inherent power to recall could not be used to excuse gross negligence, and the restoration applications were rejected for want of sufficient cause. Case-Laws Income Tax Sat, 21 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17893