Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Mohd. Farukh Ansari v. Commissioner Meerut Division, Meerut & Others - WRIT - C No. 32140 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 12354 (19 July 2007)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Hon'ble Arun Tandon, J.

Petitioner is stated to have filed an Appeal under Section 47 of the Indian Stamp Act.  There was a delay of nearly three months in filing of the Appeal.  Therefore, the petitioner made an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay.  This application of the petitioner has been rejected under order of the Commissioner dated 24.4.4007.  Hence this writ petition.

I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case.

The order passed by the Commissioner, Meerut Mandal, Meerut dated 24.4.2007 records  absolutely no reason for coming to the conclusion that the explanation furnished by the petitioner was not satisfactory.  It is settled law that orders which are not supported by the reasons are legally not justified.  Accordingly the order of the Commissioner is hereby quashed.

In the facts and circumstances of the case instead of remanding the matter to the Commissioner for reconsideration of the Application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act it would be in the interest of substantial justice that the Court may itself examine the matter.

The Court is satisfied that sufficient cause is made out for condoning the delay.  Petitioner is not negligent in pursuing his remedy.  Consequently the Court record that the Appeal filed by the petitioner  be treated within time and finally decided on merits.

Accordingly the present writ petition is allowed.  The Appeal is restored to its original number.    

Petitioner is directed to make the   amount for maintaining the said Appeal in accordance with the provisions applicable termed as pre-deposit, within two weeks from today along with certified copy of this order.  If the aforesaid condition is complied with, the Commissioner shall decide the  stay application which may be filed by the petitioner in the said Appeal on merits, preferably within two weeks thereafter.  Initially for a period of four weeks no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner.

In case of default, petitioner shall not be entitled to the benefit of this order.

Dated: 19.7.2007



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.