High Court of Rajasthan
Case Law Search
NAGAR PARISHAD,BHILWARA v TULSIRAM & ORS - CMA Case No. 05445 of 2004  RD-RJ 4019 (17 August 2007)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
CIVIL MISC. APPEAL No. 05445 of 2004
TULSIRAM & ORS
Mr. MANOJ BOHRA for Mr. KAILASH JOSHI, for the appellant / petitioner
Mr. MANISH PITALIYA for Mr. S.SARUPURIA, for the respondent
Date of Order : 17.8.2007
HON'BLE SHRI N P GUPTA,J.
The Registry has reported the appeal to be barred by 16 days. The impugned award is dt. 8.7.2004. Certified copy was applied on 13.7.2004, and was received on 17.7.2004.
It is alleged in the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, that the judgment was passed on 8.7.2004, and the appellant was under impression that minimum 2-3 days will be spent in preparation of certified copy, as such he could not file application for obtaining certified copy of judgment in time, and since there is no seal on the back of the judgment showing when it was applied, and prepared, as such the delay was caused in filing the appeal.
Suffice it to say that there is a seal on the back of the certified copy showing the date when it was applied.
Obviously certified copy was applied after 2-3 days, and was ready within 3-4 days, and was received also on 17.7.2004. It is also significant to note that the amount under the award has been deposited by the appellant before the Commissioner on 13.8.2004, and thus it was clear that the appellant was to file appeal but then the appeal has been filed on 28.9.2004 only for which no sufficient explanation is given.
Thus, in my view, it cannot be said that the appellant was prevented from any sufficient cause from filing the appeal within time. The application under
Section 5 of the Limitation Act is, therefore, dismissed.
Consequently, the appeal is also dismissed as time barred.
( N P GUPTA ),J. /Sushil/
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.