The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging an order of the District Judge. The Judge had allowed an application for condonation of delay to file an appeal. The court found no perversity in the order and dismissed the petition.
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.
2024:BHC-NAG:11121
1 wp 5513.24.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
Writ Petition No.5513/2024 (Rajesh V Sau. Rekha and others)
CORAM : N.R. Borkar, J. DATE : 13-09-2024.
This petition takes exception to the order dated 19-07-2024 passed by learned learned District Judge-12, Nagpur in Civil Misc. Application No.379/2023.
ii. By the order impugned, the learned District Judge has allowed the application filed by the respondent for condonation of delay in filing appeal.
iii. The respondent herein has filed the appeal against the order of the learned trial Court rejecting the application under Order 33 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure to institute the suit as an indigent person.
iv. I have perused the impugned order. There is no
perversity in the order impugned warranting interference in writ jurisdiction. The petition is dismissed.
( N.R. Borkar, J. )
Deshmukh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere in a writ petition challenging the District Judge's order allowing condonation of delay.
Whether the impugned order is perverse warranting interference in writ jurisdiction.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rajesh
Sav. Rekha and others
N.R. Borkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
