Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J
Rabia Bibi @ Rabia Khatoon, wife of Md. Qutibuddin Ansari – Appellant
Versus
Julekha Bibi, widow of late Qutubuddin Ansari – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel for the opposite parties.
2. This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India whereby prayer has been made for setting aside the order dated 05.04.2023 passed in Civil Misc. Appeal No.01 of 2023 by learned Principal District Judge, Dhanbad whereby a petition filed for restoration under Order IX Rule 4 read with Section 151 of the CPC along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has been rejected by the learned court. The further prayer is made for setting aside the order dated 13.09.2022 whereby the Original Suit No.07 of 2021 has been dismissed for non-prosecution and the prayer is also made for restoration of Probate Suit No.07 of 2021 to its original file.
3. Mr. Shashank Shekhar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that Original Suit No.07 of 2021 was at the initial stage and even notices have not been issued in that case. He submits that the said suit was dismissed for default as the court-fee was not filed within granted time. He submits that thereafter a petition for restoration of the
Procedural laws should facilitate justice, and dismissal for non-prosecution is improper if the suit has not been admitted and notices have not been issued.
Courts emphasize the need for specific reasons and orders in restoration proceedings under the Limitation Act.
A party should not be denied relief due to procedural missteps, especially when genuine misunderstanding exists concerning court dates and the case is at an early stage.
The party seeking relief should not be denied their rights without adjudication in accordance with the law.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a party cannot be deprived of justice on technical grounds, and the court can exercise discretion to condone delay in the absence of a formal ....
The court established that a formal application for condonation of delay is not mandatory under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, allowing for discretion in restoring applications.
Courts should not dismiss petitions for minor procedural irregularities when no prejudice is shown, emphasizing the importance of pursuing substantial justice.
Inherent powers under Section 151 CPC allow restoration of suits for substantial justice without a formal application for condonation of delay.
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
