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

1996 Supreme(Del) 558

S.N.KAPUR
R. C. CHAUDHRY – Appellant
Versus
PRESTIGE FINANCE AND CHIT FUND CO. PVT. LTD. – Respondent


( 1 ) A question: "whether for condonation of delay in filing an appeal, any application in writing accompanied by affidavit is essential?", is required to be answered in these five revision petitions relating to the abovesaid same parties.

( 2 ) THESE five revisions arose out of a common judgment dt. 4th Aug. , 1984 dismissing five appeals on the ground that the appeals were barred by time in view of the provisions of O. 41, R. 3-A, C. P. C.

( 3 ) FIRST the facts in brief giving rise to the present revision petitions which are as under: five petitions under Ss. 14 and 17, Arbitration Act were instituted on 20th Nov. , 1979. Objections were filed. After hearing the parties, objections filed by the petitioner were dismissed and awards were made rule of the Court by five judgments dt. 7th Jan. , 1984.

( 4 ) THE appellant applied for certified copies of judgments in five cases on 13th Jan. , 1984. The copies in appeals Nos. 25, 26 and 28 of 84 were delivered on 19th Mar. , 1984, copy in appeal No. 24/84 was delivered on 20th Mar. , 1984, and in appeal No. 27, on 24th Mar. , 1984. All the appeals were filed in the Court of senior Sub-Judge on 3rd Apr. , 1984. It is apparent that appeal









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