Single judge order condoning a 116-day delay in representing appeal suits by the Special Tahsildar due to accidental mixing of case papers at the Registry, finding the delay not wilful.
Delay of 116 days in representing appeals was condoned; CMPs allowed in terms.
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.
C.M.P.Nos.9474, 9477 & 9480 of 2020 in AS.(SR).Nos. 61477, 61478 & 61479 of 2019
C.M.P.Nos.9474, 9477 & 9480 of 2020
in
AS.(SR).Nos. 61477, 61478 & 61479 of 2019
R.MAHADEVAN, J.
Today, these matters are taken up by this Court through Video Conferencing, on account of the pandemic COVID-19.
2.These Civil Miscellaneous Petitions have been filed by the petitioner / Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition Officer, Tirupattur, seeking to condone the
delay of 116 days in representing the above Appeal Suits.
3.The challenge made in the appeals is to the common order dated
30.03.2016 passed by the learned Sub Judge, Vellore, in L.A.O.P.Nos.741, 689 & 545 of 2013.
4.It is stated by the petitioner/Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition Officer, Tirupattur that the appeals were filed on 30.04.2019 with applications to condone the delay and the same were returned for compliance of certain defects.
Since the case papers were mixed up with some other bundles in the Government Pleader office, the same could not be represented within the time stipulated by
1/3
C.M.P.Nos.9474, 9477 & 9480 of 2020 in AS.(SR).Nos. 61477, 61478 & 61479 of 2019
the Registry. After tracing out the papers, the appeals were represented with a delay of 116 days and hence, the delay occasioned is neither wilful nor wanton, but only due to the said reason.
5.Heard Mr.J.Balagopal, learned Special Government Pleader (AS)
appearing for the petitioner/appellant, who reiterated the reasons stated in the affidavits filed in support of these petitions.
6.Considering the reasons stated in the affidavits filed in support of these petitions and being satisfied with the same, the delay in representing the Appeals is condoned and these CMPs are ordered accordingly.
09.09.2020
mtl
Note::
Registry is directed to number the condone delay petitions, if the same are otherwise in order, and list the same for hearing on 14.09.2020.
C.M.P.Nos.9474, 9477 & 9480 of 2020 in AS.(SR).Nos. 61477, 61478 & 61479 of 2019
R.MAHADEVAN, J.
mtl
C.M.P.Nos.9474, 9477 & 9480 of 2020
in
AS.(SR).Nos. 61477, 61478 & 61479 of 2019
09.09.2020
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay in representing appeals before the Sub Judge can be condoned due to accidental mixing of case papers.
Whether the petitioner has satisfactorily explained the 116 days delay in filing appeals.
Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition Officer, Tirupattur
State of Tamil Nadu
R.MAHADEVAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
