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

2000 Supreme(MP) 852

K.T.THOMAS, R.P.SETHI
State of M. P. – Appellant
Versus
Pradeep Kumar – Respondent


Advocates:
Ashok Kumar Singh with Satish K. Agnihotri for appellants:
S.S. Khanduja and B.K. Satija for respondents.

JUDGEMENT

Thomas, J. -- 1. Leave granted.

2. A learned Single Judge of the High Court of Madbya Pradesh held that an appeal filed out of time unaccompanied by an application to condone the delay is liable to be axed down at the threshold and hence, the situation cannot be rectified by filing an application at any later stage. Learned, Single Judge rejected a second appeal on the sole ground that the delayed appeal was presented without accompanying an application to cond6ne the delay. An order so passed by the High Court is now being assailed before us by special leave.

3. A suit was filed by the respondents against the State of Madbya Pradesh and one of its sales Tax Officers for a decree of declaration of their title and consequential injunction in respect of a residential building. The suit was dismissed on the ground of want of jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The plaintiffs tiled an appeal before the District Court against the dismissal and the District Judge reversed the decision of the trial Court regarding jurisdiction and remanded the case to the trial Court for disposal of the suit on merits.

4. On 10.12.1996, the appellants tiled a second appeal before the High Court chal

























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