Supreme Court rejected an application for condonation of delay in filing a Special Leave to Appeal under Section 5 of the Limitation Act due to the petitioner's non-prosecution and lack of appearance.
Application for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is rejected. Special Leave to Appeal is also dismissed.
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.
21.02.2022 Sl. No. 12. Mithun
Ct.No.42.
IA No: CRAN/1/2011 (Old No: CRAN/328/2011) In
CRM 1263 of 2011
(Via Video Conference)
In the matter of : Nemai Chandra Karmakar.
…petitioner.
Mr. Prasun Kumar Dutta, A.P.P. Mr. Santanu Deb Roy, Adv.
…for the State.
This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the application for Special Leave to Appeal. The application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is pending since 2011.
None appears on behalf of the petitioner. The conduct of the petitioner suggests that he is not willing to proceed with the instant application. Therefore, the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is rejected for non-prosecution.
Consequently, the application for Special Leave to Appeal is also dismissed for non-prosecution.
( Bibek Chaudhuri, J. )
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to condone delay in filing an application for Special Leave to Appeal under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Nemai Chandra Karmakar
The State
Bibek Chaudhuri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
