SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 1374

G.B.PATTANAIK, K.RAMASWAMY
Sharafat Hussain – Appellant
Versus
Mohd. Shafiq – Respondent


ORDER

Leave granted.

We have heard learned counsel on both sides.

2 This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the High Court of Delhi made on July 25, 1995 in CMP No. 534/92 wherein it was held that the appeal had abated and consequently the same was dismissed.

3. It is not necessary to dilate upon the facts on merits. Suffice it to state that pending first appeal in the High Court, the sole appellant died on December 1, 1990. Intimation of death was given by the counsel for the respondents on August 5, 1991, but the application could not be filed due to the delay on the part of the counsel for the deceased appellant as sworn in by him in his affidavit. Consequently, the appeal having abated was dismissed on November 18, 1991. Then an application came to be filed on May 4, 1992 seeking setting aside of the abatement, condonation of the delay in filing the application and to bring the legal representatives of the sole appellant on record. That application came to be dismissed for failure to give proper explanation. Thus, this appeal by special leave.

4. The advocate for the deceased-appellant has stated in his affidavit thus :

"As I did not have with me the address of the lega




Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top