Order 22 Rule 2 and 9 -- Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973 (11 of 1973), Section 13 -- Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963), Section 5 – Application for bringing on record the Legal representative of the appellant – Condonation of delay -- Explained delay should be clearly understood in contradistinction to inordinate unexplained delay -- Delay is just one of the ingredients which has to be considered by the Court -- In addition to this, the Court must also take into account the conduct of the parties, bona fide reasons for condonation of delay and whether such delay could easily be avoided by the applicant acting with normal care and caution -- Statutory provisions mandate that applications for condonation of delay and applications belatedly filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation for bringing the legal representatives on record, should be rejected unless sufficient cause is shown for condonation of delay -- Applications cannot be allowed as a matter of right and even in a routine manner -- An applicant must essentially satisfy the above stated ingredients; then alone the Court would be inclined to condone the delay in the filing of such applications. Balwant Singh v. Jagdish Singh & Others, 2011(1) L.A.R. 325 (SC).
No comments:
Post a Comment