The High Court condoned a 277-day delay in filing an appeal against a judgment allowing eviction. The court subsequently dismissed the appeal as not pressed after the appellant undertook to vacate the premises within two months.
Interim application for condonation of delay was allowed; the main appeal was dismissed as not pressed.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI First Appeal No. 104 of 2011
Union of India
….........Appellant
Vrs.
1.Smt. Jagdeep Randhwa @ Randhawa
2.Harmanjeet Singh
3.Samrity Randhwa @ Randhawa
4.Bir Inder Singh Randhwa @ Randhawa ….......... Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH For the Appellant : M/s Rajiv Sinha, A.S.G.I, Niraj Kumar, J.C to A.S.G.I For the Respondents : Mr. Ayush Aditya
06/23.11.2017 By way of I.A. No. 8875 of 2017, Appellant seeks condonation of delay of 277 days in preferring the instant memo of appeal. The Appellant is Union of India and have explained that after passing of the impugned judgment they had filed Civil Revision No. 50 of 2010 on 30.11.2010, which was held to be not maintainable on 11.7.2011. Thereafter the instant appeal has been filed. Therefore the delay caused due to the time spent in prosecuting the civil revision on an erroneous understanding of law is fit to be condoned in terms of Section 14 of the Limitation Act.
-2-
premises. At para 8 of the reply it is stated that the sanction / approval for hiring of new accommodation for divisional workshop and store premises of Central Ground Water Board, Division-V, Ranchi has been approved on 13.11.2017 (Annexure-1 to the reply). Therefore, learned counsel for the Appellant submits that Appellant do not have any reason to press the present Appeal.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.)
A.Mohanty
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay in filing the appeal was condonable under Section 14 of the Limitation Act.
Whether the appeal should be dismissed as not pressed in light of the appellant's undertaking to vacate the premises.
Union of India
Smt. Jagdeep Randhwa @ Randhwa
Harmanjeet Singh
Samrity Randhwa @ Randhawa
Bir Inder Singh Randhwa @ Randhawa
Apareesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
