This special appeal, challenging a dismissal for want of prosecution in a delay condonation application, was held barred by limitation and dismissed with no substantive reasoning.
The appeal was dismissed for being barred by limitation.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 34 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 1087 of 2012 Appellant :- Dauly Kumari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Appellant :- S.K. Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,D.D. Chauhan,Ram Krishna Yadav
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Shashi Kant,J.
Court No. - 34
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 1087 of 2012
Appellant :- Dauly Kumari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Appellant :- S.K. Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,D.D. Chauhan,Ram Krishna Yadav
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal, J. Hon'ble Shashi Kant, J.
The application, seeking condonation of delay in filing appeal, having been dismissed vide order of date, this appeal, being barred by limitation, is also dismissed.
Dt. 23.02.2018 PS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal was barred by limitation and should be dismissed.
Dauly Kumari
State Of U.P.
Sudhir Agarwal
Shashi Kant
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
