1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1280 OF 2009 Dickey D.Chothia ..Petitioner V/s. Shri Sumermal Mishrimal Bafna & Ors. ..Respondents Mr.Suraj S.Shah for the petitioner. Mr.Vivek Kantwala with Ms.Martha Butala for respondents. ---- Coram : R.S.MOHITE,J Date : 13th July, 2009. PC 1 This is a petition filed by the original defendant against an order passed by the appellate Court of the Small Causes, refusing to condone the delay of 188 days in filing of the appeal. The order against which appeal was filed was passed on 10.8.2006. Certified copy was applied on 18.8.2006. It was ready for delivery on 6.10.2006 and was actually delivered on 31.10.2006. It was the case of the appellant that certified copy was handed over to Advocate Shri Suresh Shah. However, it is an admitted position that Mr.Suresh Shah was not an Advocate on record for the defendant. It appears that he had been engaged by the Advocate on record to prepare appeal memo. The appellant’s contention is though the appeal memo was immediately prepared the same was inadvertently not handed back to the Advocate for the defendant and since this mistake was discovered only in May-2007, the appeal came to be filed after the delay of 188 days. It is rightly found that it was for the defendant and his Advocate on record to be diligent. Shri Suresh Shah 2 was not the Advocate on record. It was the responsibility of the defendant and his Advocate to follow up the matter. No fault can be found at the reasoning of the appellate Court. Apart from this, I find that the appeal is against an order refusing action for perjury. The trial Court has observed that the initiation of this action can be considered at the final stage of the suit. This is another reason why I am not inclined to interfere with the order impugned. Hence, petition dismissed. (R.S.MOHITE,J)