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

1966 Supreme(Del) 65

I.D.DUA
RAIZADA SANWAL DAS – Appellant
Versus
KANHYA LAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.D.GUPTA, K.L.Sethi, S.P.Mahajan

Dua

( 1 ) THIS execution second appeal is directed against the order of the learned Additional District Judge, Delhi, dismisring the appeal from the order of a learned Subordinate Judge 1st Class dated 17th May, 1963 as barred by time and also as improperly filed.

( 2 ) THE facts on which the conclusion of the court below is founded are that the order of the executing court was made on 17th May, 1963. Application for copy was made on 20th May, 1963 and the same was ready on 5th July, 1963. Its delivery was taken on 15th July, 1903. In the meantime, an appeal had been filed on 1st June, 1963 without a duly attested copy but with an unattested true copy. It is conceded before me that aftertaking into account the time spent inobtaining the certified copy, the limitation for the appeal was to expire on 23rd July, 1963, However, on 20th July. 1963, the appeal was taken up for hearing and dismissed in default of appearance by the appellant. An application was made for its restoration on the same day which was allowed on 20th August, 1963. It is asserted on behalf of the appellant and not disputed on behalf of the respondents that the certified copy of the order was produced in court on 2



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