Litigant Should Not Suffer for Lawyer’s Mistake, 1,093-Day Delay Condoned: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Indore has partly allowed a civil revision filed by Deepak Afle in a property dispute involving Dharam Developers and Finvest Limited. In its order dated October 8, 2026, Justice Vinay Saraf condoned a delay of 1,093 days in filing an application to set aside an ex-parte decree, subject to payment of ₹50,000 in costs.

The dispute concerns a 0.169-hectare plot of land in village Machal, Indore district. Dharam Developers and Finvest Limited had filed a suit for specific performance of a contract and permanent injunction, claiming that Afle had agreed to sell the land to the company in 2012 after receiving ₹10 lakh as part payment.

Why the Delay Occurred

The suit proceeded ex parte after notices were published in the daily newspaper Nai Dunia. On August 8, 2019, the trial court passed a decree directing specific performance of the contract and granting a permanent injunction.

Afle said he first learned of the decree during execution proceedings in November 2019. He claimed that his earlier lawyer did not advise him to apply to set aside the decree and that he approached another lawyer after learning in July 2022 that the earlier lawyer had shifted to Kerala.

His application, filed on November 17, 2022, was dismissed by the trial court because of the delay. The Thirteenth District Judge, Indore, upheld that decision on February 28, 2025.

High Court’s Observations

The High Court held that a litigant should not suffer solely because of a mistake by their lawyer. It also considered the COVID-19 period, during which the Supreme Court had excluded the period from March 15, 2020, to March 28, 2022, from limitation calculations in relevant cases.

The court observed that the lower courts had taken an overly technical approach and that refusing to condone the delay could cause serious prejudice to Afle.

Final Decision

The High Court set aside the orders dated April 13, 2024, and February 28, 2025, and condoned the delay subject to payment of ₹50,000 to the plaintiff.

The matter has been sent back to the trial court, which must now consider Afle’s application to set aside the ex-parte decree on its merits, without being influenced by the High Court’s observations. The High Court has not itself set aside the original property decree.

Case Details

Case Title: Deepak Afle vs Dharam Developers and Finvest Limited through Authorized Director Surendrasingh and Others

Case Number: Civil Revision No. 514 of 2025

Judge or Bench: Justice Vinay Saraf

Decision Date: October 8, 2026