Rashtrawadi Sharamshakti Mahasagh vs Mr. Rajiv Kumar Agarwal Rp Of Ispat ...
- CitationInterlocutory Application No.4617/2022
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The delay in re-filing a memorandum of appeal, after the Registry returned it for curing defects, may be condoned where the appellant shows sufficient cause, such as the time needed to obtain typed copies of documents and the signatures of clients required for the declaration and verification.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Rashtrawadi Sharamshakti Mahasagh .... Appellant
Vs.
Rajiv Kumar Agarwal, RP of Ispat Profiles India Ltd. & Ors. .... Respondents
Appearance: Kawalpreet Kaur with Umesh Kumar and Summaya Khatoon, Advocates for the Appellant.
06.12.2022
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 01.11.2022 and the Office after scrutiny of the Memo of Appeal on 11.11.2022, intimated the defects to the Appellant on the same day and returned the Memo of Appeal to the Appellants on 16.11.2022. The Appellant re-filed the Memo of Appeal on 30.11.2022. It is stated in the Interlocutory Application (IA) that the applicant had to get typed copies of certain documents and had to call the clients from Pune to obtain their signatures on the sheets wherein the declaration and verification was to be made, which took some time. Hence, there is delay of 15 days in re- filing 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