The court condoned a six-day delay in filing an appeal based on sufficient reasons given in an affidavit. Proceedings against the 5th respondent were dismissed as there was no subsisting interest.
Delay condoned and proceedings against 5th respondent dismissed.
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.No.12729 of 2016 in A.S.S.R.No.51516 of 2016
P.T.ASHA, J.
Learned Counsel, R.Murali entered appearance for
respondents 2, 6 and 7.
that since there is no subsisting interest for the 5th respondent in the
suit property, the appellant would not proceed against the 5th respondent.
3.The memo is taken on file. The proceedings against the 5 respondent is dismissed.
4.An application is filed for condoning the delay of 6 days
in filing the appeal.
5.Sufficient reasons have been given in the affidavit filed in support of the application and accordingly, the delay is condoned.
1/2
order.
01.10.2021
gd/shr
2/2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to condone a six-day delay in filing the appeal.
Whether to dismiss proceedings against the 5th respondent due to lack of subsisting interest.
Appellant
Respondents 2, 6 and 7
5th Respondent
P.T. Asha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
