Security Printing & Minting Corpn. of India Ltd. vs Workmen
- SCC(2016) 16 SCC 120
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a party fails to attend a hearing due to administrative oversight by its counsel's office, and thereafter provides an application for restoration with reasons satisfying the appellate court, the orders dismissing the original petition for default and affirming that dismissal shall be set aside and the matter restored for hearing on merits, provided the party pays the stipulated costs within the prescribed time.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Security Printing & Minting Corporation of India Ltd. ...Appellant
VERSUS
The Workmen through the General Secretary & Ors. ...Respondents
O R D E R
Leave granted.
This is an appeal from an order passed by a Division Bench of the High Court at Bombay in LPA No. 202 of 2008, by which an order of a learned Single Judge passed in W.P. No. 5400 of 1996 was affirmed. The Writ Petition filed by the appellant was dismissed for default as it was not attended by the learned counsel for the appellant at the time of hearing.
An application for restoration of the Writ Petition was filed in which the reason for not 2 attending was that the clerk of the learned counsel, who looked after the matter, missed the matter on board. The learned Single Judge rejected the application and being aggrieved, a Letters Patent Appeal was filed, which was also dismissed by the Division Bench of the High Court.
Feeling aggrieved by the said orders, the appellants have come to this Court by way of a Special Leave Petition, which on grant of leave, was heard in presence of the learned counsel for the parties. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the application for restoration and the reasons mentioned therein, we are satisfied with the reasons given by the appellants in their application for restoration for not attending the writ petition at the time of hearing.
For the reasons aforesaid, the impugned orders are set aside. The appeal is allowed and the writ petition is restored to its original file, which 3 will be heard on merits subject to payment of Rs.20,000/- as costs by the appellant to be paid to the respondents within two months from this date.
In default, this appeal shall stand dismissed and the order of the High Court shall stand affirmed.
In the event, the amount is paid, the writ petition shall be heard on merits within a period of three months from the date of depositing the amount, as mentioned hereinabove. There will be no order as to costs.
.......................................................J.
[Tarun Chatterjee]
New Delhi; .............................................................J.
December 11, 2009. [Surinder Singh Nijjar]
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free