The High Court bench allowed the application of the appellant to deposit delayed court costs of Rs.500/within two weeks, holding that the delay was non-deliberate and should not foreclose litigation rights.
Appellant is allowed to deposit the costs of Rs. 500/- within two weeks to comply with the earlier order dated 4.9.2007.
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.
1
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CA NO.5911/2009 IN FIRST APPEAL ST.14211/2004
Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders
Court’s or Judge’s orders.
CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J.
DATE : 17th July, 2009.
.Heard learned Counsel for the
appellant and learned AGP.
2)Being dissatisfied with the
inadequate enhancement by the Reference
Court, where the agricultural land to
the extent of 12 hectares and 21 R. were
acquired for public purpose, the
appellant preferred first appeal seeking
enhancement of the compensation. The
first appeal was delayed, consequently,
CA No.6400/2004 was moved, allowed by
this Court by order dated 4.9.2007,
saddling costs of Rs.500/- within four
weeks to the legal services Authority.
However, unfortunately, costs could not
be deposited in the schedule. The matter
was again placed before this Court on 2nd
July, 2008, but since the counsel lost
track of the matter, the orders remained
non-complied and hence the delay.
3)The above grounds indicate
2
slackness in compliance of the deposit
of Rs.500, it is naturally not
deliberate. The knowledge for such
payment was lastly dated 20th March,
2009, the delay in depositing the amount
of costs being not deliberate, should
not foreclose the rights of the
appellant. Consequently, the appellant
is allowed to deposit the costs of Rs.
500/- in compliance of the order dated
4.9.2007 within two weeks. Application
allowed in above terms.
bdv/ca5911.09
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appellant's rights to prefer a first appeal should be foreclosed due to a non-deliberate delay in depositing court costs of Rs.500/.
Appellant
Respondents
K.U.CHANDIWAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court