Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

PARAMJIT KAUR & ORS versus KRISHAN KUMAR & ORS.

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Paramjit Kaur & Ors v. Krishan Kumar & Ors. - FAO-609-2004 [2006] RD-P&H 6321 (31 August 2006)

FAO No.609 of 2004 (O&M) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

DATE OF DECISION: 10.7.2006

Paramjit Kaur and others

...Appellants

versus

Krishan Kumar and others.

... Respondents

CORAM:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Uma Nath Singh.
Hon'ble Mr.Justice M.M.S.Bedi.

Present: Mr.V.K.Kataria, Advocate

for the appellants.

Mr.R.S.Kundu, Addl.AG, Haryana

for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

UMA NATH SINGH, J. (ORAL)

Refiling of this appeal is barred by more than 9 years' (3611 days') delay. The only explanation for the said inordinate delay as given by learned counsel for the appellants is that the appellants were not informed about the status of the case by the earlier counsel. Learned counsel also referred to Rule 5(1)( 2) of Chapter 1-A (a) of the Punjab and Haryana High Court Rules and Orders to contend that the rule is only directory in nature. On the other hand, learned State counsel vehemently opposed the application and cited a Division Bench judgment of this Court reported in 1980 PLR 155 (Prithvi Raj versus Smt.Kamal Kanta), contending that in a case where the application for re-filing had been made only after a delay of 3 months, this Court had dismissed the application and, consequently, the appeal.

We have also perused the impugned award. Way back in 1993, a sum of Rs.1,44,000/- was awarded in death case of an agriculturist. The income of the deceased claimed before the Tribunal appears to be Rs.3,000/- per month. It is now 13 years since the impugned award was rendered and considering the inflation rate, the value of the compensation amount of Rs.1.44,000/- would multiply astronomically today.

Thus, we are not inclined to accept the application for condonation of delay in refiling the appeal, which is, hereby, dismissed. Consequently, this FAO No.609 of 2004 is dismissed on the ground of delay itself.

( UMA NATH SINGH )

JUDGE

July 10, 2006 ( M.M.S.BEDI )

pk JUDGE


Copyright

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

Advertisement

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 |

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