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

1997 Supreme(Raj) 425

R.R.YADAV
Central Bank of India – Appellant
Versus
Rakesh Kumar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
O.P. Punglia, for Appellant R.K. Singhal, for Respondent

Honble YADAV, J.–The instant first appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree passed on 9.5.1995 beyond 93 days alongwith an application under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act supported with an affidavit.

(2). I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and have perused the application moved under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act. It is evident from perusal of the application that no facts are disclosed in chronological order as on which date the judgment was delivered, on which date decree was prepared, on which date the certified copy for the judgment was applied, on which date the certified copy was ready in copying department and on which date it was received by the appellants counsel. Learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Punglia invited my attention towards the paragraph 6 of the application wherein it is said that relevant papers were sent to Advocate, Shri Roshan Lal Gupta. In the paragraph 6 nowhere it is averred that when certified copy of the judgment and decree was applied, on which date it was prepared in copying department and when it was delivered to the appellant. Limitation is to be computed from the date of prepara- tion of certified c





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