Condonation of delay Archives | Page 3 of 4

Sikkim HC | Court refuses to condone delay where application drafted in haphazard manner and with nary a care to detail or explanation

Sikkim High Court: A Division Bench of Vijai Kumar Bist, CJ and Meenakshi Madan Rai, J. dismissed a writ petition filed against the

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Case Briefs Tribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

NCDRC | IFFCO directed to pay enhanced compensation to farmers who suffered loss of crop due to defective seeds bought from it

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): V.K Jain (Presiding Member), J. allowed a revision petition filed by a farmer seeking enhancement of

Case Briefs Foreign Courts

SA HC | ‘Plascon-Evans Rule’ could not resolve the disputed facts; application referred to trial

South Africa High Court, Free State Division, Bloemfontein: V.M. Morobane, AJ. referred the application to trial as the facts were not capable

Case Briefs Tribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

NCDRC | Law of limitation has to be applied with all its rigor even though it may harshly affect a particular party

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi: C. Viswanath (Presiding Member) dismissed a revision petition as the petitioner was not able to

Case Briefs Tribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

NGT | Delay in filing an appeal can be condoned on supply of sufficient cause, once the events of intervening period are explained

National Green Tribunal (NGT), Delhi: A Coram of Justice Raghuvendra S. Rathore (Judicial Member) and Dr Satyawan Singh Garbyal (Expert Member) allowed

Case Briefs High Courts

J&K HC | Unending period for launching remedy may lead to an unending uncertainty and consequential anarchy; application for condonation of delay rejected

Jammu & Kashmir High Court: Sanjay Kumar Gupta, J. rejected an application for seeking condonation of delay in the filing review petition.

Case Briefs High Courts

Bom HC | Time period fixed under Or. 8 R. 1 CPC is directory in nature; delay in filing written statement condoned

Bombay High Court at Goa: C.V. Bhadang, J., condoned a delay of 50 days in filing the written statement. As per facts

Case Briefs High Courts

Del HC | Court is not storage of petitions filed by negligent litigants: Not permitted to blame previous counsel after 21 years for not providing case record

‘Vigilantibus, non-dermientibus, jura subveniunt’ (the law helps those who are watchful and not those who are asleep) Delhi High Court: Vinod Goel, J.,

Case Briefs High Courts

P&H HC | DRT has jurisdiction under S. 5 of Limitation Act to condone delay if application filed with Securitization Application

Punjab and Haryana High Court: This petition was filed before a Division Bench of Amit Rawal and Arun Kumar Tyagi, JJ. against

Case Briefs High Courts

Decisive factor for condonation of delay is not length of delay but sufficient and satisfactory explanation

Gujarat High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of S.H. Vora, J. allowed the condonation of delay as the sufficient cause stands

Case Briefs High Courts

Appeal filed along with application for condonation of delay when dismissed is a decree within Section 2(2) CPC

Orissa High Court: A Single Judge Bench of Dr A.K. Rath, J., dismissed a writ petition challenging the order passed by the

Case Briefs High Courts

Discretionary order for condonation of delay passed by quasi-judicial powers cannot be interfered with in writ jurisdiction

Jammu and Kashmir High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Sanjeev Kumar, J., dismissed the current writ petition invoked for quashing

Case Briefs High Courts

Increasing tendency of treating delay in filing as a non-serious matter: Need for a vigilant and cautious approach by the Courts

Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Single Judge Bench of Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J., dismissed a revision petition filed against the order of

Case Briefs High Courts

Time consumed in party bona fidely litigating cause before wrong forum is to be considered for condonation of delay

Bombay High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of A.M. Dhavale, J. allowed an appeal filed against the order of District Judge

Case Briefs High Courts

Application seeking condonation of delay must meet the test of Section 5 of the Jammu & Kashmir Limitation Samvat, 1995 and satisfy the court with sufficient cause for delay

Jammu & Kashmir High Court: A Single Judge bench comprising of M.K. Hanjura, J. while dealing with an application for condonation of

Case Briefs High Courts

Application seeking condonation of delay and main proceeding cannot be clubbed together along with adduced evidence under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir: The Bench of Alok Aradhe J. recently addressed a revision petition wherein the petitioner challenged the

SCC Times

Condonation of delay

Sikkim HC | Court refuses to condone delay where application drafted in haphazard manner and with nary a care to detail or explanation

NCDRC | IFFCO directed to pay enhanced compensation to farmers who suffered loss of crop due to defective seeds bought from it

SA HC | ‘Plascon-Evans Rule’ could not resolve the disputed facts; application referred to trial

NCDRC | Law of limitation has to be applied with all its rigor even though it may harshly affect a particular party

NGT | Delay in filing an appeal can be condoned on supply of sufficient cause, once the events of intervening period are explained

J&K HC | Unending period for launching remedy may lead to an unending uncertainty and consequential anarchy; application for condonation of delay rejected

Bom HC | Time period fixed under Or. 8 R. 1 CPC is directory in nature; delay in filing written statement condoned

Del HC | Court is not storage of petitions filed by negligent litigants: Not permitted to blame previous counsel after 21 years for not providing case record

P&H HC | DRT has jurisdiction under S. 5 of Limitation Act to condone delay if application filed with Securitization Application

Decisive factor for condonation of delay is not length of delay but sufficient and satisfactory explanation

Appeal filed along with application for condonation of delay when dismissed is a decree within Section 2(2) CPC

Discretionary order for condonation of delay passed by quasi-judicial powers cannot be interfered with in writ jurisdiction

Increasing tendency of treating delay in filing as a non-serious matter: Need for a vigilant and cautious approach by the Courts

Time consumed in party bona fidely litigating cause before wrong forum is to be considered for condonation of delay

Application seeking condonation of delay must meet the test of Section 5 of the Jammu & Kashmir Limitation Samvat, 1995 and satisfy the court with sufficient cause for delay

Principles while considering petition for condonation of delay reiterated, lack of bona fides is ground for dismissal

Condonation of delay rejected due to ‘lackadaisical approach’ of the applicant

Period of delay is not the criteria while considering application under Section 5 of Limitation Act

Power under S. 5 of Limitation Act is not to be exercised in a mechanical manner

Application seeking condonation of delay and main proceeding cannot be clubbed together along with adduced evidence under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC