Showing : 41-50 of 138 Results

UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 100, Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5-- Restoration of second appeal - Condonation of delay - Second appeal transferred to another Court got dismissed for default - Applicants in delay condonation application have categorically stated that no notice of transfer were sent to them - Held, there is just reason for no, appearance in Court..........
NATIONAL DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 15, 21(b)-- Appeal - Limitation - Condonation of delay - Delay of more than 10 months in filing appeal before the State Commission and delay of more than one year in filing revision - No cogent and sufficient ground has been mentioned seeking condonation of delay, except for bald assertion that discussions..........
NATIONAL DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 15, 21(b)-- Appeal - Limitation - Condonation of delay - Delay of 289 in filing appeal before the State Commission - Plea that the petitioner being a patient of slipped disc could not file the appeal within prescribed period - Medical reports pertain to the year 2003 - There is nothing on record to show that..........
PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHANDIGARH
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 15-- Appeal - Limitation - Order passed by District Forum on 11.11.2009 but appeal filed on 25.3.2010 - No application for condonation of delay filed and pleaded in the appeal that the impugned order came to the knowledge of the appellant on 2.3.2010 when he was served through bailable warrants by..........
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 15, Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, Section 70-- Appeal - Condonation of delay - Delay of 374 days in filing appeal - Plea that against the order of District Forum petitioner chose to move before Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies - Difficult to understand why the petitioner chose this route when under the CP Act, 1986 the appellate..........
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5-- Delay - Condonation - Term `sufficient cause' is required to be interpreted liberally because it does not cause prejudice to either of the parties - On the other hand non condonation of delay and dismissing the appeal, on account of bar of limitation may cause immense loss to the party, whose..........
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5-- Delay - Condonation - Delay in filing appeal against ex parte decree - Earlier application for setting aside ex parte proceedings was dismissed and thereafter matter remained pending for five years - Plea that counsel did not inform her about passing of the ex parte decree - `Sufficient cause' in..........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5-- Condonation of delay - Delay of 569 days in filling appeal by State - Due to heavy load of work it slipped out of mind that case has been decided - Not believable - No sufficient reason assigned - Order dismissing application upheld - Chief Secretary directed to hold departmental enquiry and fix..........
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 19-- Appeal - Condonation of delay - Delay of 205 days in filing the appeal - The reasons for delay stated in the application and additional affidavit found not sufficient - There is no reason to condone the undue delay - Appeal dismissed on the ground of uncondonable delay...........
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 15-- Appeal - Condonation of delay - Sufficient cause - Delay of 83 days in filing appeal before the State Commission - The only cause shown was that the file was moving from table to table - Rightly held to be not sufficient cause...........

Showing : 41-50 of 138 Results