Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Manoj Kumar Vs Babita Devi — Execution and Attachment | Jharkhand HC (2017)

Home
Jharkhand HC
2017
Manoj Kumar Vs Babita DeviManoj Kumar v. Babita Devi

Allowed

Manoj Kumar v. Babita Devi

Jharkhand HC5 Sept 2017C.M.P./83/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed and disposed of IA No. 3682 of 2017, condoning a delay of 824 days to file a civil miscellaneous petition. Simultaneously, it allowed and disposed of CMP No. 83 of 2017, restoring F.A. No. 194 of 2013 for two weeks to remove office defects.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 824 days in filing the civil miscellaneous petition was condoned. Time of two weeks was granted to remove office defects in the restored First Appeal.

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Delay of 824 days in filing the civil miscellaneous petition was condoned. Time of two weeks was granted to remove office defects in the restored First Appeal.

Issue for consideration

Whether an Indian court can condone a delay of 824 days in filing a civil miscellaneous petition based on reasons given. +2 more

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

In a two-fold oral order dated 05.09.2017, the High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi held that there were reasonable reasons to condone a 824-day delay in filing a civil miscellaneous petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Additionally, the Court restored a dismissed First Appeal for two weeks to cure office defects, with a strict injunction that failure to comply would result in dismissal again.

A compact analysis

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.

A

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI

I.A. No. 3682 of 2017

With

C.M.P. No. 83 of 2017

Manoj Kumar

Versus Babita Devi

...Petitioner

...Opposite Party

---

CORAM :- HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA

For the Petitioner : Mr. H.K. Mahato, Advocate. For the Opp. Party : Mr. S.K. Tiwari, Advocate

06/ Dated 05.09.2017: (Oral Order) Per D.N.Patel, A.C.J.

[I.A. No. 3682 of 2017]

This interlocutory application has been preferred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 824 days in preferring the present civil miscellaneous petition.

Having heard counsel for both the sides and looking to the reasons stated in the interlocutory application, especially in paragraph Nos. 3 & 4, there are reasonable reasons to condone the delay of 824 days in preferring the present civil miscellaneous petition. We, therefore, condone the delay in preferring the present civil miscellaneous petition.

Accordingly, I.A. No. 3682 of 2017 stands allowed and disposed of .

[C.M.P. No. 83 of 2017]

This civil miscellaneous petition has been preferred for restoration of F.A. No. 194 of 2013, which was dismissed for default for want of removal of office defects. 5. Counsel for the appellant (petitioner herein) submitted that within a period of two weeks from today, defects will be removed from F.A. No. 194 of 2013.

Upon such assurance, this civil miscellaneous petition is allowed and disposed of.

-2-

We, hereby, recall the order dated 13.10.2014 and the time to remove office defects is granted for further two weeks from today in F.A. No. 194 of 2013. If the office defects are not removed within two weeks from today, again F.A. No. 194 of 2013 will be dismissed for want of removal of office defects.

(Ratnaker Bhengra,J.)

SD/SB

Issues for consideration

3 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether an Indian court can condone a delay of 824 days in filing a civil miscellaneous petition based on reasons given.
2.
Whether an order dismissing a First Appeal for office defects can be restored to allow removal of such defects.
3.
Whether the direction regarding removal of defects within two weeks in a civil deficiency case is tenable.

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Limitation Act, 19635

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Manoj Kumar
respondent
Babita Devi

Coram

AI extract

Ratnaker Bhengra

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Jharkhand HC
Decided on: 5 Sept 2017 · September
Registered: 9 Mar 2017
Case no.: C.M.P./83/2017
CNR: JHHC010110262017
Topic: Execution and Attachment
Bench: Acting Ratnaker Bhengra
Disposal: Allowed

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Acting Ratnaker Bhengra

Arjun Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.
4 Sept 2017
Vinay Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.
25 Aug 2017
Dr Shashi Bhushan Kumar Vs Birsa Agricultural University and Ors.
25 Aug 2017
Bankteshwar Singh and Anr. Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.
5 Sept 2017
Umesh Kumar Singh Alias Umesh Singh Vs State Election Commission through the State of Election Commissioner and Anr.
5 Sept 2017
Dinu Kumar Pandey Vs Union of India and Ors.
5 Sept 2017

Cite this judgement

Manoj Kumar v. Babita Devi, C.M.P./83/2017 (JH), decided on 5 September 2017.

The High Court of Jharkhand publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Limitation Act, 19635

View all statutes

Bench / Coram

Ratnaker Bhengra

Parties & counsel