N.Senthilkumar v. the Kcp Ltd.
Case brief
What is this about?
The court allowed a petition to condone a 123-day delay in filing a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, finding reasons in the affidavit satisfactory despite the first respondent's absence.
What did the court decide?
Condonation of delay of 123 days in filing the appeal and direction to number the appeal and list it for admission.
What the court decided
C.M.P.No.12303 of 2020 in CMA.Sr.No. 74496 of 2020
V.BHARATHIDASAN,J.
The petitioner/Appellant has filed this petition to condone the delay of 123 days in filing the appeal .
- Heard the counsel for the
petitioner and the counsel for the second respondent.
- Eventhough notice served on the first respondent and his name is also printed in the cause list, none appeared on behalf of the first respondent.
- Considering the submission made on either side and being satisfied with the reasons assigned in the affidavit filed in support of this petition, the delay is condoned and this petition is allowed.
- Registry is directed to number the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, if it is otherwise the papers are found to be in order and print the name of Mrs.R.Rathna Thara, for the second respondent and post the matter on 16.12.2020 for admission.
mrp
08.12.2020
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether delay of 123 days in filing Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is condonable.
Whether the petition for condonation of delay deserves to be allowed.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
The Petitioner/Appellant
- respondent
Mrs. R. Rathna Thara
Coram
V.BHARATHIDASAN
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court