"Very Easy To Blame Lawyer": Orissa HC Refuses To Condone Delay In Case First Launched In 2006, Says Litigant Did Not Keep Touch With Advocate

The Orissa High Court has held that an advocate cannot be blamed for sheer negligence of a party resulting in considerable delay in compliance of Court’s order. While denying condonation of delay to the petitioner, the Division Bench of Chief Justice Subhasis Talapatra and Justice Sangam Kumar Sahoo observed, “It is very easy to change lawyer and to put blame on the earlier lawyer for his/her negligence, but the Court cannot turn a blind eye to the surrounding circumstances, eventualities and most importantly, the conducts of the party before it marches on to believe the allegations levelled by the party against his Advocate as a gospel truth.” The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash the order passed by the Tahasildar-cum-OEA Collector, Puri which was later confirmed by the Additional District Magistrate, Puri. On that date, the Court adjourned the case for one week granting last opportunity to the petitioner to file the requisites, failing which it was clarified that the matter will stand dismissed automatically. In the application, it was stated that the petitioner in good faith believed that his counsel were properly conducting his case but on 14.12.2019, it came to his knowledge that the petition has been dismissed for non-compliance of the order passed by the Court on 08.01.2016. Court’s Observations The Court noted that the sole ground taken for condonation of the delay is the negligence of the conducting counsel in taking steps at right time in complying with the order of the Court as well as unawareness on the part of the petitioner regarding the order passed by the Court.