Rajasthan High Court Restores Appeal Dismissed For Non-Removal Of Defects, Says Party Can't Suffer For 'Procedural Abdication' By Lawyer
Nupur Agrawal
9 Jun 2026 9:21 AM IST
Rajasthan High Court restored an appeal which was earlier dismissed on account of non-curing of defects observing that administration of justice cannot be permitted to founder upon hyper-technicalities, nor can a party be made to suffer irreversible prejudice for the inadvertent default or procedural abdication of his legal representative.
For context, the Court was hearing a restoration application for an appeal which was dismissed by the Registry based on the directions of the coordinate bench of the Court. The Court had observed that no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner on the relevant date when the counsel was obligated to remove the defects within a period of 2 weeks.
It was submitted by the petitioner that owing to some change in the administrative set up in the office of the government counsel, the order did not come in the knowledge, and hence, needful could not be done within the stipulated timeline. Due to this, the appeal was dismissed.
The bench of Justice Farjand Ali said:
"An appeal assailing such findings cannot be dismissed in limine merely because the advocate could not remove the defect within stipulated time. Such a procedural irregularity, attributable to counsel, does not ipso facto efface or annihilate the substantive and statutory right of appeal vested in the accused. Furthermore, any order resulting in dismissal under such circumstances must be a reasoned and speaking order, evincing conscious and judicious application of mind to the factual and legal substratum of the case. It must delineate the rationale which impelled the Court to adopt such a course and withstand scrutiny on the touchstone of fairness, proportionality, and judicial propriety. Consequently, this Court deems it appropriate to undertake a further appraisal of the judgment under challenge".
It further said that a lis instituted by a litigant ought to be adjudicated on its intrinsic merits rather than being non-suited on account of trivial or technical infractions, particularly where such lapses stem from inadvertence or omission on the part of counsel in complying with procedural directions.
“The administration of justice cannot be permitted to founder upon hyper-technicalities, nor can a party be made to suffer irreversible prejudice for the inadvertent default or procedural abdication of his legal representative.”
Accordingly, the application was allowed, and the appeal was directed to be restored and listed in accordance with law.
Title: State of Rajasthan & Ors. v Nava & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 224
