HPTDC sought condonation of delay in refiling its Regular Second Appeal, citing winter vacation and delay in sanctioning court fee. The court accepted these explanations, held procedure cannot defeat a just claim, and allowed the application subject to costs of ₹500.
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.
HPTDC Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner & Ors.
Reserved on: 31.5.2024
RSA No. 90 of 2023
12.06.2024 Present Mr Shivank Singh Panta, Advocate, for the appellant.
Mr. Rahul Mahajan, Advocate, for respondent No. 1.
Mr Prateek Pal, Advocate, vice Mr Vivek Sharma, Advocate, for respondents No. 2(a) to 2(c).
CMP No. 4443 of 2023
The applicant/appellant has filed the present application for condonation of delay in refiling the appeal. It has been asserted that the applicant preferred a Regular Second Appeal against the judgment and decree dated 30.09.2022 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, CBI Court, Shimla. The appeal was filed on 03.01.2023 and it was scrutinized by the Registry on 05.01.2023. The Registry raised certain objections and returned the Regular Second Appeal to the learned counsel for the applicant to enable him to remove the office objections on or before 12.01.2023. Thereafter, winter vacation started in the High Court and the objections could not be removed. When the High Court opened after the winter vacations, the learned counsel asked the legal wing of the Corporation to send the requisite amount for the payment of the court fee as one of the objections raised was that the proper court fee was not paid. The legal wing after ascertaining the exact amount of the court fee submitted the
file to the Finance Department for sanctioning the amount. The file was sent at the beginning of the year 2023 with the requisite amount of court fee enabling the learned counsel for the applicant to remove the office objection and re-file the appeal. Hence, the application for condoning the delay in refiling the appeal.
he prayed that the present application be allowed and delay in refiling the appeal be condoned.
requirements laid down under the Rules framed by it and some concession has to be given to it for complying with the Rules.
(Rakesh Kainthla) Judge
12 June, 2024 (mamta/tabrez)
1 issue framed by the court
Should the delay in refiling the Regular Second Appeal be condoned given winter vacations and procedural delay in sanctioning court fee?
HPTDC
Regional Provident Fund Commissioner
Respondents No. 2(a) to 2(c)
Rakesh Kainthla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
