Annappa @ Appanna vs Special Land Acquisition Officer
- CitationAIRONLINE 2009 SC 629
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an appeal is dismissed by the High Court solely on the ground of delay in filing, and the appellate court has not considered the merits of the case, the Supreme Court may set aside that dismissal upon condonation of the delay subject to the condition that the appellant pays costs, provided the circumstances justify condonation, and remit the case to the High Court for consideration on merits.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
ANNAPPA @ APPANNA ....APPELLANT VERSUS SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER ....RESPONDENT
ORDER
Leave granted.
This is an appeal directed against an order dated 4th November, 2006 passed
by a learned Judge of the High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore in Misc. First Appeal
No.9905 of 2005, by which the High Court, only on the ground of delay, had
dismissed the appeal filed before it.
Despite service, none appeared on behalf of the respondent to oppose this
special leave petition. We have ourselves examined the application for condonation of
delay of 872 days in filing the appeal before the High Court and also facts and
circumstances of the present case. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant
and after going through the application for condonation of delay, we are of the view
that the delay in filing the appeal before the High Court may be condoned subject to
the condition that the appellant shall deposit or pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as cost in
the High Court within a period of four weeks from this date.
contd...2/-
`::2::
In default of non-payment, impugned order of the High Court shall stand
affirmed. However, if the aforesaid amount is deposited, impugned order of the High
Court shall stand set aside, Misc. First Appeal shall be restored to its original number
and the High Court shall decide the appeal on merits within a period of four months
from the date of depositing of the cost as directed above. We make it clear that we
have not gone into the merits of the case which shall be decided by the High Court.
The civil appeal is accordingly disposed of with no order as to costs.
.........................J. (TARUN CHATTERJEE)
.........................J. (H.L. DATTU) NEW DELHI, JANUARY 9, 2009.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free