A single judge dismissed a restoration application and a condonation of delay petition filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, holding that the appellant failed to show plausible reasons for the inordinate delay of approximately two years.
The restoration application and the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act were 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 BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Restoration Application No. 447/2015
Nand Lal And Another
----Petitioner
Versus
Banwari Lal And Another
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sonu Kumar for Mr. Keshav Agarwal
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order
10/05/2023
This court vide order dt. 17.9.2023 had directed the appellant to remove the defects pointed out by the registry, failing which appeal was directed to dismiss automatically without further reference to this court. On 29.10.2013, the Civil Misc. Appeal was dismissed.
Since, the defects were not removed within the given time, no plausible reason has been shown in the application u/s 5 of the Limtation Act for condoning such inordinate delay of about 2 years.
Present restoration application has been filed by the appellant in the year 2015. Alongwith the restoration application, an application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed.
So no ground is made out to condone the delay.
The application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act as well as restoration application stand dismissed.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J
Brijesh 23.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether delay of about 2 years in filing restoration application could be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Nand Lal And Another
Banwari Lal And Another
Narendra Singh Dhaddha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
