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

2009 Supreme(SC) 66

Supreme Court of India
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE TARUN CHATTERJEE & THE HONOURABLE MR.
JUSTICE H.L. DATTU
State of Jharkhand & Others
Versus
Ashok Kumar Chokhani & Others
Civil Appeal No. 306 of 2009
Decided On: 19-01-2009

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants:B.B. Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Nagendra Rai, Sr. Advocate, Jayesh and T. Mahipal, Advocates.

Headnote:A) Limitation Act, 1963, section 5:- While dealing with a petition for candonation of delay it is not proper to deal with the merits of the case and on satisfactory explaining of the reasons for the delay held the order rejecting to condone the delay is unjustified. (Para 2 and 3)

Judgment:

Leave granted.

2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the averments made in the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal and after considering the impugned order, which is cryptic in nature, we are of the view that delay in filing the appeal has been explained by the appellant as we find from the averments made in the application for condonation of delay that such averments do constitute sufficient cause for condoning the delay in filing the appeal.

3. It is true that an observation has been made by the High Court in the impugned order that the subject matter in the appeal also did not suffer from any infirmity but it is well settled that while deciding an application of condonation of delay in filing the appeal, the High Court could not go into the merits of the same. Even assuming that the High Court had the power to go into that question, then also, in our view, the impugned order does not disclose any reason why the subject matter in the appeal did not suffer from any infirmity.

4. That being the position, the impugned order is set aside. The delay in filing the appeal is condoned. The High Court is requested to decide LPA No. 611 of 2006 and dispose of the same after giving hearing to the parties and after passing a reasoned order in accordance with law within three months from the date of supply of a copy of this order. This appeal is thus disposed of. There will be no order as to costs.

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 Back to top