Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIVEK SINGH THAKUR
Jogindra Central Co-operative Bank Limited – Appellant
Versus
Himachal Aluminium Company Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for condonation of delay. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. claim of counsel regarding error in appeal procedure. (Para 3 , 4 , 6) |
| 3. details of timeline for trial court's order. (Para 5 , 8) |
| 4. insufficient explanation for delay criticized. (Para 7 , 9 , 11 , 15) |
| 5. supreme court precedents on condonation standards. (Para 10 , 12 , 14 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 6. final dismissal of application. (Para 19) |
JUDGMENT :
Vivek Singh Thakur, J.
This application has been filed for condonation of delay in filing Criminal Appeal against judgment dated 28.03.2014 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Solan, in Case No.4/3 of 2001/98 titled Jogindra Central Co-operative Bank Limited vs. M/s Himachal Aluminium Company Ltd.
2. It is apt to record that, as on date, respondent No.1- Company is not in existence, however, respondent No.2-Bhag Chand Jain, on the basis of record, has been found to be acting as Director of the Company, at the relevant point of time, i.e. on the date of alleged commission of the offence and, therefore, it has been observed by this Court that presence of Bhag Chand Jain would be sufficient for adjudicating the present matter.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant/appellant
The applicant must provide reasonable and acceptable explanations for filing delays beyond the limitation period, which mere bureaucratic processes often do not satisfy.
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
