Shanivi Construction Private Limited vs Kaashvi Parasher
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) No. 26 of 2026
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
While deciding an application to recall an order dismissing an appeal for want of prosecution, the Tribunal confines its consideration to the grounds set out in the restoration application itself, and the applicant's past conduct in the proceedings is not to be taken into account. Where the reasons given in the restoration application show that the matter should be decided on its merits, the order dismissing the appeal in default may be recalled and the appeal restored for adjudication on merits.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Shanivi Constructions Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant (s)
Versus
Kaashvi Parasher ...Respondent (s)
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Ravi Verma, Adv. For Respondent : Mr Maharshi Kaler, Advocate.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
27.07.2026: This company appeal is listed on a Restoration Application
(AT) No. 8 of 2026, where the appellant has sought recall of the order dated
28.01.2026, whereby the company appeal was dismissed for want of
prosecution.
2. The application for restoration is being vehemently opposed by the
respondent contending thereof that there is no logical ground made out by
the appellant in the application, which could call for recalling of the order
dismissing the company appeal for want of prosecution.
3. Besides that Ld. Counsel for the appellant also submits that, the past
conduct also shows that the appellant has not been diligently enough in
participating in the proceedings.
4. Having considering the reasons given in the application and
particularly for the purpose of an effective adjudication of the lis on merits, -2-
the matter requires to be considered on merits. While considering a
particular application court has to confine to the application, past conduct of
the applicant is not to be seen.
5. Thus, the Restoration Application (AT) No. 8 of 2026 would stand
allowed. The order dismissing the company appeal in default dated
28.01.2026, would stand recalled. The Company Appeal (AT) No. 26 of 2026
is restored to its original number.
6. Let the company appeal be listed to be considered on its merits.
7. The Respondent Counsel may file a counter to the main appeal within
a period of three weeks from today.
8. List this matter on 11.09.2026.
[Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma] Member (Judicial)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical)
[Indevar Pandey] Member (Technical)
SA/rr
Restoration Application (AT) No. 8 of 2026
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