Back
MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI
Jaipur Development Authority – Appellant
Versus
Omprakash Poonia – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. Heard on application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
2. This appeal is barred by 214 days.
3. The only explanation as offered in the application for condonation of delay is as below:-
(iv) That in pursuance of the above said, the opinion along with the copy of Judgment was placed before the Deputy Commissioner, Zone- 7 on 7.1.2019 and thereafter the same was forwarded to the legal cell of JDA. In the aforesaid exercise, on account of movement of file at different levels it took some time.
(v) that in pursuance of the opinion of Counsel the matter was placed before the Committee, which on 12.02.2019 proposed for filing of the Appeal before the Hon'ble Division Bench.
(vi) That i
Government entities must provide compelling reasons for delays in legal proceedings, as bureaucratic inefficiencies are insufficient for condonation.
Government agencies must provide sufficient justification for delays in legal filings; bureaucratic inefficiencies are not valid grounds for condonation of delay.
The court emphasized that delay condonation is an exception and should not be used as an anticipated benefit for government departments. It also highlighted the need for government bodies to perform ....
The court emphasized that administrative inaction does not justify delay in legal proceedings, and that adequate cause must be shown, especially by State authorities.
The court ruled that bureaucratic delays do not constitute sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing appeals, emphasizing that the law of limitation binds all parties.
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
