Rajesh Toshniwal & Anr vs Kamal Nayan Jain
- CitationInterlocutory Application No.5135/2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal condones a delay in re-filing a Memo of Appeal on the basis that the reasons stated in the interlocutory application (the client being out of station and certain documents not being available, with further time consumed in preparing the application for exemption from filing clear copies) are sufficient cause for the delay, and directs the matter to be listed for admission as a fresh case.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Rajesh Toshniwal & Anr. .... Appellants
Vs.
Kamal Nayan Jain .... Respondent
Appearance: S.K. Sharma and Dyuti Ghai, Advocates for the Appellants.
6th November, 2023
This is an application to extend the time granted for curing the defects.
2. The facts of the case are that the Appellants e-filed the Memo of Appeal on 18.09.2023. The Office after scrutiny of the Memo of Appeal on 27.09.2023, intimated the defects to the Appellants on the same day. The Appellants re-filed the Memo of Appeal on 11.10.2023. It is stated in the Interlocutory Application (IA) that though all the defects were cured, but certain further defects were marked. The delay was due to the reason that the client has gone out of station and certain documents were not available. Time was consumed further in preparation of the Application seeking exemption for filing the clear copies. Hence, there is delay of 09 days in refiling the Memo of Appeal, so the same may be condoned. However, as per the Report of the Registry, the delay is of 07 days.
3. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants and perused the averments made in the IA as well as Office report.
4. Considering the submissions made on behalf of the Appellants 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