Back
M. V. MURALIDARAN
Khwairakpam Loken Singh, S/o Kh. Kulla Singh – Appellant
Versus
Rajkumar Imo Singh, S/o (L) R. K. Jaichandra Singh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application filed for condoning delay in review. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding dismissal of suspicious applications. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court's analysis on sufficient cause for delay. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. order to condone delay and allow application. (Para 18 , 19) |
JUDGMENT & ORDER :
This application has been filed by the applicant to condone the delay of 215 days in filing the review petition against the order dated 15.4.2019 passed in MC (EP) No.15 of 2018.
[2] The applicant is the election petitioner in Election Petition No.5 of 2017.
[3] Heard Mr. M. Gunedhor, learned counsel for the applicant/election petitioner and Mr. H.S. Paonam, learned senior counsel for the respondent.
[4] Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that during the proceedings of the election petition, he had filed two miscellaneous cases, being MC (EP) Nos.16 and 15, on 10.5.2018 and both the cases were listed on several occasions and heard on different dates. However, on 14.1.2019, after conclusion of hearing of MC (EP) No.16 of 2018, the same was dismissed and against the said order dated 14.1.2019, SLP No.10804 of 2019 was preferred and same is
Each day's delay in filing a review petition must be adequately explained, and failure to do so may lead to dismissal.
Timeliness is crucial in election petitions; even minimal delay is not condonable, leading to automatic dismissal under the Representation of People Act, 1951.
The court ruled that local self-governments must adhere to limitation laws with no special exemptions and must provide adequate justification for any delay in filing petitions.
The court ruled that a party cannot justify an inordinate delay in filing a review petition based on subsequent overruling of a prior decision, as it violates the principles of limitation and suffici....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of expeditious proceedings and the need for reasoned judgments, especially in time-sensitive matters like election petitions.
Courts may refuse to condone delay in filing a Review Petition if the explanation offered for seeking condonation of delay is found unsatisfactory.
The State must provide satisfactory reasons for delay in filing petitions; bureaucratic inefficiency is no excuse. Condonation of delay should not undermine the principles of timely justice.
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
