The court dismissed a first appeal against an order that rejected a delay condonation application deemed time-barred, finding the appeal itself barred by limitation due to lack of prosecution.
The appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution as it was 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. - 33
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER DEFECTIVE No. - 161 of 1998
Appellant :- Smt. Shashi And Others Respondent :- Sukan Kumar And Others Counsel for Appellant :- Ravindra Rai
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
( Order on Application filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act)
Order Date :- 13.8.2019/Mukesh
Court No. - 33
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER DEFECTIVE No. - 161 of 1998
Appellant :- Smt. Shashi And Others Respondent :- Sukan Kumar And Others Counsel for Appellant :- Ravindra Rai
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
The application seeking condonation of delay for filing appeal having been rejected vide order of date, this appeal being barred by limitation, is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 13.8.2019/Mukesh
Smt. Shashi And Others
Sukan Kumar And Others
Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
