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

2009 Supreme(Raj) 188

R.S.CHAUHAN
Ganpat – Appellant
Versus
Mangla Ram – Respondent


Advocates Appeared
N.L. Pareek, for Petitioners;
S.K. Bhargava, for Respondents

JUDGMENT

Hon'ble CHAUHAN, J.—The petitioners have challenged the order dated 06.01.1975 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority ('the RAA' for short), and two orders passed by the Board of Revenue, namely order dated 20.04.1979 and 31.08.1979.

2. The writ petition was filed by the petitioners against Mangla Ram and others in the year 1981. However, during the pendency of the writ petition, Mangla Ram, the respondent No.1, expired in 1983. Despite his death, no application was moved by the petitioners for bringing his legal representatives on record till 07.09.1988. The respondents raised an objection that the application for bringing the legal representatives was inordinately delayed by five years. And yet, no application for condonation of delay had been filed along with the application for bringing the legal representatives on record. Therefore, on 16.05.1996 i.e. after eight years of having filed the application for brining the legal representatives on record, an application for condonation of delay was filed by the petitioners. After hearing both the parties, vide judgment dated 24.07.1997, the learned Single Judge dismissed the application and held that the writ petition has a























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