Review petition filed with an incorrect condonation of delay explanation was dismissed due to extraordinary delay without plausible reason
Condonation of delay for review petition declined; review petition 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.
$~27
M/S NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD ..... Appellant Through: Mr. D.K. Sharma, Adv. versus
RAJA RAM YADAV & OTHERS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. K.K. Aggarwal, Ms. Gyatri Aggarwal & Mr. Aayush Agrawal, Advs. for applicant/R-4.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA O R D E R % 19.11.2018
Review Petition no. 320/2018 & CM Nos. 34092-93/2018
The applicant was the fourth respondent in MAC Appeal No. 448/2014, which was heard and decided by judgment passed on 03.11.2017. He has come up for review, almost a year after the said order being passed, the application for condonation of delay stating that there has been a delay of 18 days only. This submission on its face is incorrect. The reference to “oversight” on the part of the counsel earlier engaged cannot be presented as a reason or ground for seeking condonation of such extraordinary delay.
There being no plausible explanation, the prayer for condonation of delay is declined.
Consequently, all the applications including, for review are dismissed.
R.K.GAUBA, J
NOVEMBER 19, 2018/ nk
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the delay of nearly a year in filing the review petition can be condoned on the ground of overlooked memo by counsel.
M/S National Insurance Co. Ltd.
Raja Ram Yadav & Others
R.K.Gauba
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
