Petition to condone an 83-day delay in filing a second appeal against a decree in A.S.No.2 of 2018, delay attributed to the petitioner's financial constraints as a farmer. The court found the reasons justifiable and allowed the petition, directing numbering of the appeal.
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. 15923 of 2023 in S.A.SR.No.49458 of 2023
C.M.P. No. 15923 of 2023 in S.A.SR.No.49458 of 2024
T.V. THAMILSELVI, J.
This petition has been filed seeking to condone the delay of 83 days in filing the above Second Appeal against the judgment and decree dated 12.10.2022 passed in A.S.No.2 of 2018.
2.The learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the petitioner is farmer due to financial constraint he was not able to filed the second appeal immediately. Hence, there is a delay of 83 days in filing the above second appeal arose, which is neither willful nor wanton. Therefore, he filed this petition to condone the delay in filing the above second appeal.
the petitioner in the affidavit is justifiable one. Accordingly, this court is inclined to allow this petition. Registry is directed to number the Second Appeal if it is otherwise found to be in order and post the matter on 14.08.2024.
pbl
07.08.2024
C.M.P. No. 15923 of 2023 in S.A.SR.No.49458 of 2024
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.
pbl
C.M.P.No. 15923 of 2023 in S.A.SR. No. 49458 of 2023
07.08.2024
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the 83-day delay in filing the second appeal should be condoned?
Petitioner in C.M.P. No. 15923 of 2023
T.V. Thamilselvi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
