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

2008 Supreme(Pat) 906

GHANSHYAM PRASAD, R.M.LODHA
State Of Bihar – Appellant
Versus
Dayanand Jha – Respondent


Judgment

1. We heard the counsel for the parties.

2. The appeal suffers from delay of 469 days and for condonation thereof, an application (LA. No. 4397 of 2007) has been made.

3. That, the impugned order came to be passed on 27th March, 2006, is not in dispute. It is stated that the cause of action for tiling the present Letter Patent Appeal arose when a Fax message from the State Counsel was received in legal section about the disposal of Civil Review No. 206 of 2000 filed by the State on 16.4.2007. It is further stated that thereafter an application for obtaining certified copy of the judgment in Civil Review No. 206 of 2000 was made. The certified copy of the judgment was received on 9.5.2007 and the Under Secretary endorsed the file to Establishment Section on 10.5.2007. The file was received in the Establishment Section on 11.5.2007 and the Establishment Section put up the file for proper decision in the matter on 21.5.2007. It is further stated that on 12.6.2007, the Principal Secretary forwarded the file to the Law Department for advice of the Advocate General whose opinion was received and thereafter the file was returned on 13.7.2007. After receiving the legal opinion from






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