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

2009 Supreme(Del) 721

SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA
Binod Engineering & Mechanical Works – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Chetan Sharma, Sr. Adv. with Mr. D. Moitra, Advocates
Mr. J.M. Kalra, Advocate

ORDER

IA No.9995 & 9996 of 2008

1. This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been made by the applicant/Judgment Debtor for condonation of delay in moving the application being IA No.9996 of 2008 under Order 9 Rule 13 of CPC for setting aside the ex parte decree/judgment dated 15th March 2004.

.2. The arbitration award dated 25th March 1998 was filed in the Court by the Arbitrator and notice of the award was sent to the applicant. The applicant filed objections against the award under Section 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. However, the objections were dismissed by this Court for non prosecution as well as in default on 15th March 2004 and the award

.was made a rule of the Court on 15th March 2004 and the decree sheet was ordered to be prepared. The applicant made an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC on 14.08.2008 for setting aside order dated 15th March 2004 and also made an application for condonation of delay of 1550 days.

3. The applicant has made this application under Section 5 of Limitation Act stating therein that the applicant firm became non-functional sometime in the year 1998 due to d














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