The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by M/s Zapp India Ltd. The petitioner challenged an order of the Revisional Authority dismissing a revision petition due to delay exceeding the statutory condonation limit. The Court was not inclined to condone the indefinite delay or interfere with the impugned order.
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 BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3214/2022
M/s Zapp India Ltd., Through Its Authorized Representative Mr. VimalSaraf, Registered Office At Saraf House MI Road Jaipur 302001, Rajasthan
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aditya Jain, Advocate Ms. Neha Gyamlani, Advocate Ms. Bhavya Golecha, Advocate
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Order
04/05/2022
Heard.
Aggrieved by the order passed by the Revisional Authority on 09.12.2021, this petition has been preferred by the petitioner. The main ground to assail the order passed by the Revisional Authority is that though there was delay in approaching the Revisional
(2 of 2)
[CW-3214/2022]
Authority and the revision was beyond period of three months, which could not be condoned, the petitioner had substantial grounds to assail the demand of Rs.84,467/-.
After going through the order passed by the Revisional Authority, we find that against the order dated 19.08.2016 revision was filed on 18.07.2019. The Revisional Authority taking into consideration its limited power to allow condonation of delay upto maximum of six months, has dismissed the revision petition holding that it has no jurisdiction to condone long delay.
The reason assigned by the Ld. Revisional Authority is in accordance with law that its jurisdiction to condone the delay itself is restricted and it could not condone the delay of indefinite period.
Though, learned counsel for the petitioner sought to raise the issue on merits of the case, the Revisional Authority on merits also has taken into consideration the order passed by the authority. The total amount in dispute appears to be Rs.84,467/-.
Therefore, we are not inclined to interfere with the order and the writ petition is dismissed.
(SAMEER JAIN),J
(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACTING CJ
Karan/4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should condone the delay beyond six months in filing the revision petition.
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Revisional Authority's dismissal of the revision petition on account of delay.
M/s Zapp India Ltd.
Union Of India
Manindra Mohan Shrivastava
Sameer Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
