Back
C. M. POONACHA
M. G. Jagadish Since Deceased By Lrs M. J. Vijayalakshmi, Akhila D Ananthram – Appellant
Versus
Additional Registrar of Co-Operative Societies – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of property dispute. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments regarding procedural errors and delay. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 3. court's reasoning on delay and jurisdictional aspects. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 4. condonation of delay is justified. (Para 32) |
| 5. order to allow petition and condone delay. (Para 33) |
ORDER :
C.M. Poonacha, J.
The present writ petition is filed challenging the judgment dated 31.3.2015 passed in Appeal No.588/1999 by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') and for the other reliefs.
2. The relevant facts necessary for consideration of the present petition are that one Sri. M.G.Jagadish (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased'), a member of the second respondent - society, was allotted an industrial site bearing No.7 in Vijinapura Village, Krishnarajapura Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, measuring east to west 50 feet, north to south 100 feet in the Industrial layout called "OMR Layout" and possession of the said site was handed over to him vide Possession Certificate dated 17.6.1970. Construction in
A party's consistent efforts to negotiate and explain delays in legal proceedings can warrant the condonation of delay if sufficient cause is established, especially concerning property rights.
Conduct, behaviour and attitude relating to inaction/negligence by the appellant disentitle him to seek discretionary relief.
The court emphasized the importance of establishing joint family property and the need to satisfactorily explain inordinate delay in filing an appeal, as per Sec. 96 of CPC and Sec. 51 of the Limitat....
Failure to record reasons for condoning inordinate unexplained delay violates natural justice; constitutes jurisdictional error warranting writ interference under Article 226 despite alternate remedy....
The discretion to condone delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act must be exercised judiciously, ensuring substantial justice while adhering to statutory principles.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
