Mr. Sarang Rakesh Wadhawan vs Punjab And Maharashtra Cooperative ...
- CitationInterlocutory Application No.2113
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The delay in re-filing a memo of appeal that was returned by the Registry for defects may be condoned where the appellant's judicial custody and the consequent difficulty in communicating with counsel are shown in the application to be sufficient reason for the delay.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Sarang Kumar Wadhawan .... Appellant
Versus
Punjab and Maharashtra Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr. .... Respondents
Appearance: Disha Shah, Subir Kumar and Kishan Kumar, Advocates for the Appellant.
12.07.2022
This hearing has been held through video conferencing.
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 17.05.2022 and the Office after scrutiny of the Memo of Appeal on 24.05.2022, intimated the defects to the Appellant on the same day and returned the Memo of Appeal to the Appellant on 25.05.2022. The Appellant re-filed the Memo of Appeal on 02.06.2022. It is stated in the Interlocutory Application (IA) that as the Appellant herein is under the judicial custody and communication of the Appellant with the Attorney was very tedious and hampered. Hence, there is delay of two days' in refiling the Memo of Appeal, so the same may be condoned.
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