Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
N.J.JAMADAR
Dhyan Foundation, Through Its Representative Mr. Vedprakash Mishra – Appellant
Versus
Google LLC. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
N. J. JAMADAR, J.
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and with the consent of the parties, heard finally.
2. As these petitions have their genesis in the orders passed by the learned Magistrate, in one and the same proceeding, the petitions were heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.
3. The petitioner is a registered charitable non-profit organization. It is promoting the cause of animal welfare. The petitioner works for the rescue, care, treatment and rehabilitation of animals, with the assistance of law enforcement agencies. YouTube, a social media intermediary, is operated by Google LLC – Respondent No. 1.
4. The petitioner alleges the Respondent No. 1 has allowed to broadcast and publish five per se defamatory videos, on YouTube platform. Those videos containing baseless, false and the defamatory imputations against the petitioner were widely circulated. They have the propensity to tarnish the image and reputation of the petitioner.
5. The petitioner thus filed a miscellaneous application, being MA No.4907/2021, before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Ballard Pier, Mumbai. By an order dated 31st March, 2023, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate allowe
The court affirmed the necessity of a liberal approach to condonation of delay in legal proceedings to promote substantive justice, while refraining from commenting on the magistrate's jurisdiction r....
The court emphasizes a liberal approach to condoning delay, highlighting that procedural errors should not obstruct substantial justice when sufficient cause is shown.
The court emphasized that sufficient cause for delay under the Limitation Act must be established, aligning government entities with private litigants regarding the standards for delay condonation.
The court emphasized that applications for condonation of delay should be decided on merits, prioritizing substantial justice over technicalities, especially when the delay is not due to negligence.
The law of limitation applies equally to all parties, including State entities, and delays cannot be condoned unless supported by sufficient and clear explanations.
(1) – Limitation period – Length of delay is a relevant matter which court must take into consideration while considering whether delay should be condoned or not – While considering plea for condona....
The court emphasized that litigants owe a duty to track their cases vigilantly and cannot solely blame their lawyers for delays when seeking to condone significant time lapses.
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
