Allowed

Numaligarh Refinery Ltd. and 2 Ors. v. Iqubal Singh and Anr.

Gauhati HC8 Sept 2024I.A.(Civil)/3620/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an interlocutory application, this Court considered a prayer to condone a delay of 2300 days in filing a connected writ appeal. Finding that the applicants satisfactorily explained the delay, the application was allowed.

What did the court decide?

Allowed the interlocutory application and condoned a delay of 2300 days in filing the connected writ appeal.

Numaligarh Refinery Ltd. and 2 Ors. Vs Iqubal… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010274082023

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3620/2023

¶5

NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD. AND 2 ORS.

¶6

A PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING, REGISTERED UNDER SEC. 617 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE 122A, G.S. ROAD, CHRISTIAN BASTI, GUWAHATI- 781005, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶7

2: THE SR. MANAGER MATERIALS COMMERCIAL DEPARTMENT NUMALIGARH REFINERY LIMITED P.O. NUMALIGARH DIST. GOLAGHAT (ASSAM).

¶8

3: THE MANAGER MATERIALS COMMERCIAL DEPARTMENT NUMALIGARH REFINERY LIMITED P.O.- NUMALIGARH DIST. GOLAGHAT (ASSAM)

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

IQUBAL SINGH AND ANR.

¶11

SON OF LATE I. SINGH R/O JPR ROAD, (NEAR RICE MILL), JORHAT, ASSAM.

¶12

2:THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF CGST AND CENTRAL EXCISE GUWAHATI GST BHAWAN (5TH FLOOR) KEDAR ROAD MACHKHOWA GUWAHATI PIN- 781001 (ASSAM)

¶13

Page No.# 2/4

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D SAHU, MR. R S MISHRA

¶15

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, GST,

¶16

Linked Case :

¶17

NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD. AND 2 ORS.

¶18

VERSUS IQUBAL SINGH AND ANR. B

¶19

-----------Advocate for : MR. D SAHU Advocate for : appearing for IQUBAL SINGH AND ANR. B

¶20

Linked Case :

¶21

NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD. AND 2 ORS.

¶22

VERSUS

¶23

IQUBAL SINGH AND ANR. B

¶24

-----------Advocate for : MR. D SAHU Advocate for : appearing for IQUBAL SINGH AND ANR. B

¶25

Page No.# 3/4

¶26

BEFORE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR

¶27

ORDER

¶28

Date : 09.09.2024 ( Vijay Bishnoi, CJ)

¶29

The matter comes upon for consideration of the I.A.(C)/3620/2023 with a prayer to condone the delay of 2300 days in filing the connected writ appeal.

¶30

The learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the learned Single Judge has ruled against the applicants vide order dated 12.05.2015, passed in WP(C)/3165/2010 and being aggrieved with the same, the applicants had preferred a review petition on 28.06.2015, which came to be disposed of only on 20.06.2023 and thereafter, the applicants had preferred the connected writ appeal along with application for condonation of delay on 15.09.2023.

¶31

The learned counsel for the applicants has therefore, submitted that the delay in filing the connected writ appeal is bonafide, because, the review petition filed by them remained pending before the learned Single Judge for quite a long time. It is further contended that on merits also, the applicants have a good case based on strong grounds and therefore, the delay of 2300 days may kindly be condoned.

¶32

Notices have been served to all the non-applicants, however, no reply, opposing the application has been filed on behalf of the respondent no. 2, who is represented through counsel.

¶33

However, despite service of notice upon the respondent no. 1, none has appeared for the said respondent.

¶34

Taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances of the case, we

¶35

Page No.# 4/4

¶36

are of the view that the applicants have satisfactorily explained the delay of 2300 days in filing the connected writ appeal. Hence, the Interlocutory application is allowed and the delay of 2300 days in filing the connected writ appeal is condoned.

¶37

Registry to register the connected writ appeal and list the same before this Court after 3(three) weeks, for admission.

¶38

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶39

Comparing Assistant

Numaligarh Refinery Ltd. and 2 Ors. v. Iqubal Singh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Numaligarh Refinery Ltd. and 2 Ors. v. Iqubal Singh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Banjit Chutia and 9 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

No. 971170449 Ct/Gd Lekh Raj Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Madhu Ram Deka Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Tapan Timung Vs Anupam Nirman Pvt. Ltd.

The State of Assam and Ors. Vs Saiful Islam

The Union of India and 2 Ors. Vs Dhanya Kanta Bora