Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA
Skyline Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, J.
1. At the outset, it is made clear that since no affidavits have been invited, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed to have been denied by all the respondents.
2. Affidavit of service filed today in Court be kept on record.
3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that only 16 respondents had contested in the Tribunal, out of whom one has been served and the endorsements in respect of the others is “refused.”
4. Learned Senior Counsel hastens to add that the said refusals are evident not from postal service but from private service effected by the registered clerk of an advocate of this Court, which is also reflected in the connected affidavit of service. In view of the affidavit being before us, we construe such service to have been effected duly.
5. Be it mentioned here that some of the private respondents are represented through counsel at the time of hearing, as are the State respondents.
6. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners argues that the learned Tribunal acted without jurisdiction and de hors the law in refusing to condone the delay of about 561 days in preferring the original applicat
Court reiterated the need for sufficient cause in condoning delay, emphasizing that inordinate delays without justifiable reasons will not be entertained.
The interpretation of 'sufficient cause' in the context of delay condonation applications should be liberal, focusing on the reasons for the delay rather than the duration alone, provided there is no....
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
