Special Appeal Defective No. 34 of 2006 before Court No. 34. The appellant's civil appeal against rejection of a delay condonation application was dismissed as it was barred by limitation.
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. - 34 of 2006
Appellant :- Kamlesh Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Appellant :- G.K. Singh,P.K. Upadhyaya,V.K. Singh,Vijay Prakash Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
(Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application No.10466 of 2016)
Order Date :- 18.4.2019 I.A.Siddiqui
Court No. - 34
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 34 of 2006
Appellant :- Kamlesh Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Appellant :- G.K. Singh,P.K. Upadhyaya,V.K. Singh,Vijay Prakash Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
The application seeking condonation of delay in filing appeal having been rejected vide order of date, this appeal being barred by limitation, is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 18.4.2019 I.A.Siddiqui
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the application seeking condonation of delay should be allowed when it is barred by limitation.
Whether a civil appeal can be dismissed for want of prosecution.
Kamlesh Kumar
State Of U.P.
Sudhir Agarwal
Rajendra Kumar-IV
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
