Back
J. RAJENDRA
Lucknow Development Authority – Appellant
Versus
Visheshwar Prasad – Respondent
ORDER (ORAL)
As per the record of the Registry, there is a delay of 384 days in filing of this Revision Petition. The petitioner filed IA No. 9497 of 2023 seeking condonation of delay for 383 days. As per the said IA, the impugned order was passed on 08.04.2022. Thereafter, the concerned Advocate perused the documents/ records and final judgment and submitted his report to the Chief Legal Advisor of the Petitioner for further decision. The Chief Legal Advisor perused the impugned order and the report submitted and recommended for filing the instant Revision Petition. Thereafter on 09.12.2022, the panel counsel of the Lucknow Development Authority, Mr. UN Mishra, learned Advocate was assigned to file the Revision Petition and all related documents were forwarded on 07.01.2023 for drafting and filing of the same. Since several documents were in Hindi the same were translated, and the petition was drafted and forwarded to the department for approval. After approval of the petition, the affidavits were signed and attested by the authorized representative in Delhi on 16.07.2023.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the delay occurred in filing of the present revision pet
(1) Each day’s delay - The petitioner failed to explain or show sufficient reason for delay of each day as required under the law. In the instant case, the cause shown for delay that the issue pertai....
(1) Protracted delay - The petitioner failed to show sufficient reason for delay of each day as required under the law. In the instant case, the cause shown for delay that the issue pertains to the d....
“Sufficient Cause”- ‘sufficient cause’ means that the party should not have acted in a negligent manner or there was a want of bona fide on its part and that the applicant must satisfy that he was pr....
‘Sufficient Cause’ means that the party should not have acted in a negligent manner or there was a want of bona fide on its part & applicant must satisfy that he was prevented by any “sufficient caus....
1. Limitation - Limitation has to be applied with all its rigour when the statute so prescribes, though it may harshly affect a particular party. 2. Condonation of delay - Condonation of delay is not....
(1) Where case has been presented in court beyond limitation, applicant has to explain the court as to what was the “sufficient cause” which prevented him to approach court within limitation.(2) When....
Condonation of delay is not a matter of right and the applicant has to set out the care showing sufficient cause which prevented them to come to the commission.
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
