Allowed

Bhai Nand Lal Khalsa Public School and Anr. v. Harender Kaur

Punjab & Haryana HC15 Jan 2019CR/1127/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Justice Amit Rawal allowed the revision petition, setting aside the order dismissing the delay condonation application. The court directed the refunding party to pay Rs. 50,000 as costs, a condition precedent for the appeal to be filed within ten months.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order is set aside subject to the payment of costs of Rs. 50,000/- as a condition precedent; parties directed to appeal within ten months.

Bhai Nand Lal Khalsa Public School… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2019)

¶1

YOGESH SHARMA 2019.01.23 11:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 1

¶2

CR-1127-2016 (O&M)

¶3

201

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶5

CR-1127-2016 (O&M) Date of decision : 15.01.2019

¶6

Bhai Nand Lal Khalsa Public School and another

... Petitioners

Versus

Harender Kaur

... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶12

Present: Mr. S.S. Rangi, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶13

Mr. M.K. Bhatnagar, Advocate for Mr. V.K. Sharma, Advocate for the respondent.

¶14

¶15

AMIT RAWAL, J. (ORAL)

¶16

The present revision petition is directed against the order dated 13.08.2015 (Annexure P-3), whereby the application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal against the judgment and decree dated 03.12.2010, passed against the petitioners-defendants, has been dismissed being barred by one year.

¶17

The petitioners-defendants could not file the appeal within time frame owing to the reasons given in the application that when they received the summons of the execution application, submitted an application for taking certified copy as the counsel did not give opinion to file the appeal. The application was returned with the report that the file was summoned by the Civil Judge and another application was filed on 19.01.2012 and

¶18

YOGESH SHARMA 2019.01.23 11:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2

¶19

CR-1127-2016 (O&M)

¶20

certified copy was supplied on 31.01.2012. Thereafter, the appeal was filed and in this process, the delay has occurred. There are notable and arguable points, in case, the appeal is heard on merits, thus, urges this Court for setting aside the impugned order, under challenge.

¶21

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-plaintiff submitted that the impugned order, under challenge, is perfectly legal and justified as the application is bereft of the reasons of reasonable cause and delay. Such an approach by the litigant cannot be said to be bona fide or unintentional, but smacks of mala fide , thus, urges this Court for dismissal of the present revision petition.

¶22

I have heard learned counsel for the parties, appraised the paper book and of the view that there is force and merit in the submissions of Mr. Rangi, as the facts, indicated above, leaves no manner of doubt that approach of the petitioners-defendants in laying challenge to the judgment and decree dated 03.12.2010 had been lackadaisical and tardy. The right of statutory appeal by adopting mere technicality cannot be taken away, the Court below ought to have imposed certain onerous conditions upon the petitioners-defendant, instead laid focus on the decision of the appeal. However, in order to advance justice and prevent miscarriage of justice, I deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order, under challenge, subject to the payment of costs of ` 50,000/-, which shall be condition precedent.

¶23

The parties or through their counsel are directed to appear before the lower Appellate Court on 06.02.2019.

¶24

It is expected that the lower Appellate Court shall decide the

¶25

YOGESH SHARMA 2019.01.23 11:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3

¶26

CR-1127-2016 (O&M)

¶27

appeal within a period of ten months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.

¶28

The present revision petition stands disposed of.

¶29

15.01.2019 ( AMIT RAWAL ) Yogesh Sharma JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/ No Whether Reportable Yes/ No

Bhai Nand Lal Khalsa Public School and Anr. v. Harender Kaur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhai Nand Lal Khalsa Public School and Anr. v. Harender Kaur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Baldev Krishan Deceased through His Lrs Vs Kali Ram Deceased Thorugh His Lrs and Others

Harbhajan Singh Vs Nirmal Singh and Another

Madan Lal Vs Nathi Ram

Joga Singh Vs Avtar Singh Kalsi

Ram Chand Vs Udai Singh etc.

Udai Singh Vs Ram Chand