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

1996 Supreme(Kar) 67

M.F.SALDANHA
KARNATAKA BANK LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
MANJUNATHA FLOUR MILLS – Respondent


M. F. SALDANHA, J.

( 1 ) AN unfortunate situation has arisen pursuant to an Order passed in this regular first appeal when the court had occasion to deal with la. I for condonation of delay. Those facts will be recounted slightly later because they are relevant. This court passed an Order dated 28-7-1995 directing the registrar to discontinue the practice of returning papers to the advocates after the same had been checked and various office objections noted, as a result of which the removal of objections would have to be attended to within the court premises without the lawyer being permitted to physically take back the records and retain them for an indefinite period of time. The raison detre for this decision was because experience has shown that the number of cases in which papers are properly presented along with all necessary annexures and the court fees, shockingly enough are less than 4%, and that therefore, in almost all cases barring this microscopic number, there is abnormal and heavy delay as a result of his default. What had been happening was that once the papers were returned to the learned advocates that for a variety of reasons, they did not come back sometimes for



































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