Allowed chamber appeal to set aside an order dismissing an original application due to non-compliance of office objections, attributing the delay to the fault of previous counsel, and ordered restoration of the application.
Chamber Appeal allowed; order dated 22.08.2022 set aside; Original Application (D) No.500 of 2019 to be restored.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
| 09.01.2026 | Exh. | Roznama-MDRT-II Chamber Appeal No.3 of 2023 |
Next date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mr O.A. Das and Ms Riddhi Bawdane, Advocate for the Appellant. None for Respondent. |
|||
| Heard on Chamber Appeal No.3 of 2023. The Appellant filed Chamber Appeal praying to set aside/recall the Order dated 22.08.2022 passed by the Ld. Registrar and to restore the Original Application (D) No.500 of 2019. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submits that the O.A. was filed by one of the panel Advocates and thereafter did not gave any status report regarding the O.A. After several requests and reminders made by the Appellant Bank, the panel Advocate informed the Appellant Bank that the matter is pending for complying office objections and filing CAOD and thereafter returned the brief with the papers back to the Appellant Bank. On 23.08.2022, the current Ld. Advocate was assigned with the matter and after |
Page 1 of 3
inquiry the current Ld. Advocate found out that the matter was declined by the Ld. Registry by order dated 22.08.2022 for non-compliance of the office objections which the Appellant Bank state that the current Ld. Advocate informed about the said order on 05.09.2022. Thereafter, the current Ld. Advocate took appropriate steps to apply for certified copy of the said order and filed the present Chamber Appeal for setting aside the order dated 22.08.2022. Ld. Advocate for the Appellant submits that for the inaction and/or fault of their Advocate, the client should not suffer. Hence, the Appellant prays to set aside the order dated 22.08.2022 and restore the above said O.A. (D) No.500 of 2019 by this Chamber Appeal. Heard counsel for the Applicant in Chamber Appeal No.3 of 2023 and perused the record. The said order was passed by Ld. Registrar on 22.08.2022 and the
Page 2 of 3
| Appellant came to know about the | ||
|---|---|---|
| order on 05.09.2022 and filed this Appeal without delay on 06.10.2022. In these circumstances, the reasons shown by the Appellant seem to be reliable and believable regarding its non-compliance of office objections. Resultantly, Chamber Appeal No.3 of 2023 is allowed subject to cost quantified in the sum of Rs.5000/- |
||
| payable to Mumbai DRT Bar Association. Appellant is directed to comply office objections within 15 days to register O.A. (D) No.500 of 2019 after due compliance. |
||
| nrb - 14 | File of this Chamber Appeal be consigned to the Record Room after due compliance. Sd/- P.O. DRT-II |
Closed |
Page 3 of 3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an order dismissing an original application due to non-compliance of office objections should be set aside and the application restored due to the fault of previous counsel.
Appellant Bank
Respondent
P.O.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
