A C T O Ward II Circle B Alwar Vs M/S S S B Engineers Pvt. Ltd.

Office has pointed out that there is a delay of 82 days in filing the present revision petition for which separate application No. 1569/2013 has been filed seeking condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

¶13

After hearing counsel for the appellant, this court is satisfied that the delay has been satisfactorily explained, duly supported by affidavit.

¶14

Accordingly, the application seeking condonation of delay u/Sec. 5 of Limitation Act stands allowed and the delay is condoned.

¶15

The matter has come upon application for recalling the order dt. 21.11.2011 and in pursuance of the peremptory order dt. 14.09.2011 restoration of the revision petition which was dismissed for non-prosecution.

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[CRES-289/2012]

¶18

For the reasons assigned in the restoration application, the application stands allowed.

¶19

Accordingly, the revision petition is restored to its original number, provided the applicant deposits a sum of Rs.500/- with the Secretary, Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Rajasthan High Court Campus, Jaipur, within three weeks. If intimation about deposit of the amount is received by the Registry, office shall

¶20

proceed further.

¶21

(JAINENDRA KUMAR RANKA)J.

¶22

Monika/3

A C T O Ward II Circle B Alwar v. M/S S S B Engineers Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A C T O Ward II Circle B Alwar v. M/S S S B Engineers Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh Kumar Verma Vs University of Raj Jaipur

Dr Mrs Vijaya Kabra Vs Prof B L Sharma and Another

Dr K L Soni Vs Rajeev Swaroop and Others

Ajay Kumar Pancholi Vs Rahul Teneja

Anil Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Mahesh Chand Shastri Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.