The High Court dismissed a restoration application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The Court found the 2669-day delay unexplained and insufficient, holding that the cause shown was inadequate to condone the delay.
Application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and the restoration application are 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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Restoration No. 36/2018
----Petitioners
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. KR Saharan For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS
Judgment / Order
24/03/2022
Though the present restoration application has been listed for orders on application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act but this Court find that there is long and unexplained delay of 2669 days in filing the restoration application. In order to explain delay, all that has been stated in the application is as below:-
4. That the Counsel for the applicant/appellant not removed the defect pointed out by the registry and ultimately on 07.10.2019 the Appeal of the Appellant is dismissed in default for the non compliance of the aforesaid mentioned order.
This fact also not come into the knowledge of the applicants and it is also relevant to mention here that the counsel for the applicant/appellant Late Sh.D.K. Parihar passed away. Thereafter, the applicant try to contact the associates advocates of Late Sh. D. K. Parihar and then the applicants are informed that their appeal has been dismissed in 2009 and they handover the entire file to the applicants and thereafter, the counsel for the applicant applied for certified copy of the impugned
(2 of 2)
[CRES-36/2018]
order on 17.08.2016 and received the same on 12.09.2016 and immediately without causing any delay preferred this Restoration Application.
The cause shown for delay in filing the restoration application is not sufficient to condone the long delay.
Therefore the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act as well as the restoration application are dismissed.
(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J
67-nidhi/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the long unexplained delay of 2669 days in filing the restoration application can be condoned.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Lrs Of Abdul Aziz S/o Sh. Hussan
Lrs Of Abdul Hafeez S/o Sh. Hussan
Lrs Of Lal Chand S/o Sh. Moti Ram Sindhi
MADAN GOPAL VYAS
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
