Daresaheb Saheb Patel vs Bank Of India & Anr
- CitationInterlocutory Application No.1824/2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal may condone a delay in re-filing a memo of appeal after office defects are cured where the reasons advanced in the interlocutory application (illegible documents, need for signatures, voluminous appeal, and the illness of the clerk entrusted with filing) are considered sufficient to explain the delay.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Daresaheb Saheb Patel .... Appellant
Vs.
Bank of India & Anr. .... Respondents
Appearance: Abhishek Sharma and Anshuman Shrivastava, Advocates for the Appellant.
8th May, 2023
This is an application to extend the time granted for curing the defects.
2. The facts of the case are that the Appellant filed the Memo of Appeal on 31.03.2023 and the Office after scrutiny of the Memo of Appeal on 13.04.2023, intimated the defects and returned the Memo of Appeal to the Appellant on the same day. The Appellant re-filed the Memo of Appeal on 25.04.2023. It is stated in the Interlocutory Application (IA) that the documents supplied to the counsel were illegible and certain signatures were required in the documents and Appeal is also voluminous. The office clerk who was to file the Appeal was running a high fever. Hence, there is delay of 07 days in re-filing the Memo of Appeal, so the same may be condoned. However, as per the Report of Registry, the delay is of 05 days.
3. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant and perused the averments made in the IA as well as Office report.
4. Considering the submissions made on behalf of the Appellant and for the reasons mentioned in the IA, which are sufficient, the delay in re- filing the Memo of Appeal is hereby condoned.
5. As prayed, list the case before the Hon'ble Bench under the heading 'for admission (fresh case)'.
6. With the aforesaid order, this IA stands disposed of.
(Peeush Pandey) Registrar
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