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

1996 Supreme(Raj) 720

R.R.YADAV
Bhandari Das – Appellant
Versus
Sushila – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Rameshwar Chouhan, for Appellant

Honble YADAV, J. – This Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed beyond limi- tation of 1292 days. I do not consider it proper to issue notice of the application under Sec. 5 of the Indian Limitation Act for such inordinate delay.

(2). An affidavit filed in support of the condonation of delay reveals that learned counsel Shri Kuldeep Sharma assured to the appellant to inform him whenever it is required. It is also alleged that Shri Kuldeep Sharma learned counsel informed him that he is not responsible for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act but such compensation is to be paid by the Insurance Company. Learned coun- sel Shri Kuldeep Sharma also assured the appellant that he is not required to contact him on each any every date. It is pertinent to note that in support of aforesaid averments no affidavit of Shri Kuldeep Sharma is filed.

(3). The aforesaid assertions made in the affidavit do not inspire my confidence. No counsel can afford to advise his client not to attend the Court on each and every date and if such undertaking was given by him in the trial court, then, he was required to fulfil it.

(4). The averments made in the affidavit to the effect that neither their counsel infor





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