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

2001 Supreme(Pat) 993

RADHA MOHAN PRASAD
Baji Lal Mishra – Appellant
Versus
Bhagwati Sharan Mishra – Respondent


Judgment

1. A. No. 2265/2001 has come up on rejection of the prayer on behalf of the appellants for modification of the order dated 24.7.2001 passed by the Joint Registrar granting three weeks final time to serve a copy of the petition at Flag Q on the other side and also to file limitation petition for substitution petition at Flag Q.

2. It appears that in pursuance to the order of the Joint Registrar limitation petition was filed and the matter was contested before the Registrar (General) by the learned counsel for the appellants. According to him, there is no requirement to file a petition under section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing of the petition at Flag Q as the same was filed under Order XXII Rule 9 C.PC. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that under Clause (2) of Order XXII Rule 9 C.P.C. the plaintiff or the person claiming to be the legal representative of a deceased plaintiff or the assignee or the receiver in the case of an insolvent plaintiff may apply for an order to set aside the abatement or dismissal; and if it is proved that he was prevented by any sufficient cause from continuing the suit, the Court shall set aside the aba




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