Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay H Patel, filed Special Civil Suit No. 416 of 2008 before the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vadodara, against the Vadodara Municipal Corporation for recovery of Rs. 53,96,579/- for construction of 20 tubewells in the Mahi River. The suit was dismissed for default on 5.12.2017 due to non-appearance of the petitioner and his advocate. The petitioner claimed that he lost track of the matter because of internal transfers of the case between the 13th, 15th, and 16th Additional Civil Judge courts, and because he was contesting the Gujarat Vidhan Sabha Elections in 2017 as a candidate from Kheda Constituency, which prevented him from contacting his advocate. He filed a restoration application under Order IX Rule 4 read with Section 151 CPC, which was rejected by the trial court on 6.3.2019. The High Court, in this petition, considered whether the petitioner had shown sufficient cause for non-appearance. The court noted that the petitioner's reasons, including the internal transfer of the case and his election campaign, constituted sufficient cause. The court emphasized that a liberal approach should be adopted to avoid penalizing a litigant for his advocate's lapse. The High Court allowed the petition, set aside the impugned order dated 6.3.2019, and restored the suit to its original file, directing the trial court to expedite the hearing.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Restoration of Suit - Order IX Rule 4 read with Section 151 CPC - Sufficient Cause - Petitioner's suit was dismissed for default on 5.12.2017. The petitioner, a candidate in Gujarat Vidhan Sabha Elections 2017, and his advocate lost track due to internal transfer of the case between courts. The trial court rejected restoration. The High Court held that the reasons constituted sufficient cause and that courts should adopt a liberal approach to avoid penalizing a litigant for his advocate's lapse. The impugned order was set aside and the suit was restored (Paras 6-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the restoration application under Order IX Rule 4 CPC when the petitioner had shown sufficient cause for non-appearance due to his engagement in election campaigning and internal transfer of the case.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 6.3.2019 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge, Vadodara in Restoration Application No.24 of 2018 is quashed and set aside. The order dated 5.12.2017 dismissing Special Civil Suit No.416 of 2008 is also set aside. The suit is restored to its original file. The trial court is directed to expedite the hearing of the suit.
Law Points
- Restoration of suit dismissed for default
- Sufficient cause for non-appearance
- Liberal approach in condoning delay
- Order IX Rule 4 CPC
- Section 151 CPC
