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

2011 Supreme(Raj) 150

NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN
State of Rajasthan – Appellant
Versus
Rajpal Singh Chauhan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared
Ms. Raj Sharma, for Appellants;
S.S. Hora, for Respondent

JUDGMENT

Hon'ble JAIN, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Since a common question of law is involved in both second appeals, therefore, both appeals were heard together and they are being disposed off by this common Judgment.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent has raised an objection about maintainability of these second appeals, which are directed against impugned judgments passed by first appellate court, whereby first appeals of the appellants have been dismissed as barred by limitation. He submitted that in view of judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court delivered in the case of Ratansingh vs. Vijaysingh and Others, reported in AIR 2001 Supreme Court 279 = RLW 2001(3) SC 376 and Full Bench decision of Karnataka High Court in the case of The Commissioner, Hubli-Dharwad Municipal Corpn. vs. Shrishail & Others, reported in AIR 2004 Karnataka 75 Full Bench, both the second appeals are not maintainable and they are liable to be dismissed as such.

4. In S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 472/2009, the plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for declaration to declare a penalty order passed against him in disciplinary proceedings, withholding his two annual grade increments with cumulative effect
















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