Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, RAJESH KUMAR
State of Jharkhand – Appellant
Versus
Usha Sharma – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, A.C.J.
I.A. No. 5600 of 2025
1. Mr. Ashutosh Anand, learned A.A.G-III has submitted that there are some defects pointed out by the Office and as such he has filed an interlocutory application being I.A. No. 5600 of 2025 for removal of the same. The said interlocutory application has been taken up. The instant interlocutory application has been filed seeking exemption and ignoring part defect no.48 of page number 124 and 129.
2. Considering the reason assigned in the instant interlocutory application, the aforesaid defect as pointed out by the Office is ignored
3. I.A. No. 5600 of 2025 stands disposed of.
I.A. No. 5661 of 2025
4. The instant intra-court appeal, under clause 10 of the Letters Patent, is directed against the order/judgment dated 02.05.2024 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. (S) No.209 of 2024 whereby and where under the learned Single Judge has been pleased to dispose of the writ petition directing the petitioner(respondent herein) to file representation before the competent authority for redressal of his grievances including release of amount of death-cum-retiral benefits.
5. It appears that the appeal has been filed after a
Sufficient cause must be shown for condoning delay in filing appeals; lack of diligence and negligence is crucial for the court's discretion.
A comprehensive understanding of delay condonation necessitates showing bona fide reasons and adequate justification, especially for governmental appellants, with established precedents reinforcing t....
The court held that administrative delays are insufficient for condoning significant delays in appeals, emphasizing the importance of strict adherence to limitation laws and the necessity for bona fi....
The Court emphasized that sufficient cause for condoning appeal delays must include diligence and bona fides; ignorance of law and financial hardship alone are insufficient grounds for delay beyond t....
The court ruled that an inordinate delay in filing an appeal requires a sufficient explanation, and negligence or lack of bona fides can lead to dismissal of the application for condonation.
The court emphasized that sufficient cause must be shown for condoning delay in filing appeals, with negligence and inaction being critical factors.
The law of limitation is to be strictly enforced, and parties, including the government, must provide sufficient cause for any delay in filing appeals; negligence or lack of bona fides will not justi....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a sufficient cause and bona fide motive when seeking condonation of delay.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of demonstrating a bona fide motive and sufficient cause for delay condonation, highlighting that the law of limitation must be applied with all its rigour when....
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
