Facts: The applicants, Rahul Sambhu Kabade and Sambhu Umaji Kabade, filed a Civil Application seeking condonation of a 203-day delay in filing a First Appeal. The reason cited for the delay was the negligence of their previous advocate, who allegedly failed to attend to the matter or respond to their calls. The applicants claimed they discovered the suit's dismissal through the District Court website and subsequently engaged a new advocate. They also annexed WhatsApp chats from February and March 2016 related to a review application.
Procedural Posture: This case involves a Civil Application (No. 4334 of 2016) in a First Appeal (ST. No. 15872 of 2016) before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. The application seeks condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
Issue: Whether the delay of 203 days in filing the First Appeal should be condoned based on the reasons provided by the applicants, specifically the alleged negligence of their previous advocate.
Holding: The High Court dismissed the Civil Application, refusing to condone the delay. Consequently, the First Appeal and another Civil Application (No. 1860 of 2017) were also dismissed.
Reasoning: The Court found the reasons for the delay insufficient. The Court noted the applicants' presence in court with their advocate on relevant dates, contradicting their claim of the advocate's negligence. The Court also highlighted the lack of evidence, such as call data records or WhatsApp chats from the relevant period (August 2015), to support their allegations. Furthermore, the Court emphasized that allegations of negligence against an advocate should not be entertained without making the advocate a party to the proceedings. The Court cited the Supreme Court's observation in Rajneesh Kumar and Anr. versus Ved Prakash that litigants cannot simply "throw the entire blame on the head of the advocate and thereby disown him at any time and seek relief." The Court distinguished the present case from Gautam Dham Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. Funds and Properties of Parsi Panchayat & Ors., where the delay was attributed to the advocate's office staff and the advocate admitted the mistake.