Intra-court appeal against a High Court writ order directing payment of 9% interest on delayed retirement benefits delayed 941 days lacking sufficient cause, dismissed as barred by limitation.
Delay condonation application dismissed; Intra-court appeal dismissed as barred by limitation.
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.
I N THE HI GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDI GARH
LPA No. 719 of 2019 ( O&M) DATE OF DECI SI ON: 22. 05. 2019
Bachi t t ar Si ngh and ot her s …. . Appel l ant s
ver sus
St at e of Punj ab and anot her
CORAM: - HON’ BLE MR. JUSTI CE KRI SHNA MURARI , CHI EF JUSTI CE HON’ BLE MR. JUSTI CE ARUN PALLI , JUDGE
Pr esent : Shr i Sunny Si ngl a, Advocat e f or t he appel l ant s
KRI SHNA MURARI , CHI EF JUSTI CE : ( Or al )
Thi s i nt r a- Cour t appeal under cl ause- X of t he Let t er s Pat ent i s di r ect ed agai nst t he j udgment and or der dat ed 28. 04. 2016 passed by l ear ned si ngl e Judge al l owi ng t he wr i t pet i t i on f i l ed by t he appel l ant s by di r ect i ng t he r espondent s t o pay 9% i nt er est i n CWP Nos. 13405, 15324 and 15974 of 2015 and al so awar ded 9% i nt er est on del ayed payment of r et i r al benef i t s.
Of f i ce has r epor t ed del ay of 941 days i n f i l i ng t he appeal . The appeal i s accompani ed by an appl i cat i on under sect i on 5 of t he Li mi t at i on Act seeki ng condonat i on of del ay. The gr ounds set out i n t he del ay condonat i on appl i cat i on ar e t hat t he wr i t pet i t i on f i l ed by t he appel l ant s was deci ded al ong wi t h a bunch of connect ed wr i t pet i t i ons on 28. 04. 2016. A cont empt pet i t i on bei ng COCP No. 542 of 2017 was f i l ed by t he appel l ant s al l egi ng non- compl i ance of t he af or esai d or der of l ear ned si ngl e Judge. I t i s submi t t ed t hat a r epl y was f i l ed i n t he sai d COCP on 17. 10. 2018. The appel l ant s came t o know f r om t he st at ement made t her ei n t hat t hey have been pai d l ess i nt er est on t he del ayed pensi onar y benef i t s. Ther eaf t er , t hi s appeal was got pr epar ed and f i l ed.
PARKASH CHAND 2019.05.27 16:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
LPA- 719- 2019
- 2 -
The expl anat i on, as ext r act ed above, cont ai ned i n t he del ay condonat i on appl i cat i on does not i nspi r e any conf i dence nor can i t be sai d t o const i t ut e a suf f i ci ent cause so as t o condone t he i nor di nat e del ay of 941 days i n f i l i ng t he appeal . The appeal appear s t o be specul at i ve, i nasmuch as, t he j udgment passed by t he l ear ned si ngl e Judge was accept ed by t he appel l ant s and t hey even f i l ed a cont empt pet i t i on al l egi ng i t s non- compl i ance.
Apar t f r om t he above, as per t he aver ment s made by t he appel l ant s t hemsel ves, payment of l ess i nt er est came t o t hei r knowl edge when a r epl y was f i l ed i n t he cont empt pet i t i on on 17. 10. 2018. Ther eaf t er , t he appeal was f i l ed on 26. 11. 2018 whi ch was r et ur ned f or r emovi ng def ect s. I t was t hen r e- f i l ed on sever al occasi ons on 07. 01. 2019, 24. 01. 2019, 21. 02. 2019 and, l ast l y, on 20. 03. 2019. Ther e i s absol ut el y no expl anat i on wor t h t he name i n t he appl i cat i on f or condonat i on of an i nor di nat e del ay i n f i l i ng t he appeal .
I n t he wake of t he above f act s and di scussi on, we do not f i nd i t t o be a f i t case wher e del ay i s l i abl e t o be condoned.
As a r esul t , t he del ay condonat i on appl i cat i on st ands di smi ssed and, accor di ngl y, t he appeal st ands di smi ssed as bar r ed by l i mi t at i on.
( ARUN PALLI ) JUDGE
22. 05. 2019
par kash
NOTE: Whet her speaki ng/ non- speaki ng: Speaki ng Whet her r epor t abl e: YES/ NO
PARKASH CHAND 2019.05.27 16:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
LPA- 719- 2019
- 3 -
PARKASH CHAND 2019.05.27 16:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay of 941 days in filing this intra-court appeal under clause-X of Letters Patent can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
Whether the explanation given for the delay constitutes sufficient cause for condonation.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
None cited in the textReferred
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Bachittar Singh
others
State of Punjab
another
Krishna Murari
Arun Palli
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
