The High Court dismissed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act as the petitioners failed to appear. The curative review petition was finally disposed of.
Application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act dismissed as a consequence of default.
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.
03.08.2023
rpan / 46
CRR 325 of 2018
+
IA No.: CRAN 1 of 2018 (Old No.: CRAN 411 of 2018) Bandhan Panna @ Luraku & Others Vs. The State of West Bengal
Mr. Bidyut Kumar Roy, Ms. Sima Biswas
… for the State.
None appears on behalf of the petitioners.
From the record it is found that the instant revisional application was filed in the year 2018 along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act which was also pending due to non appearance of the petitioners or any learned advocate appearing on behalf of them.
In such circumstances, the application under Section 5 of
the Limitation Act stands dismissed for default.
(Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act deserves condonation when filed due to default in appearance.
Whether the revisional application and limitation extension stand dismissed due to default.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Bandhan Panna & Others
The State of West Bengal
Bibhas Ranjan De
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
