Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Chief Of Army Staff vs Ex.Rect.Vighne Bali Ram on 17 October, 2014
Bench: T.S. Thakur, Adarsh Kumar Goel, R. Banumathi
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL D. NO.(S). 26302 OF 2014
CHIEF OF ARMY STAFF & ORS. Appellant(s)
Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
EX.RECT.VIGHNE BALI RAM Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Heard.
There is an inordinate delay of 1130 days in the filing of this application for leave to appeal for which no cogent explanation is forthcoming from the petitioners to warrant our interference with the order impugned. That apart no substantial question of law of general/public importance arises for our consideration.
The prayer for condoning the delay is declined and the application for leave to appeal accordingly dismissed on the ground of limitation and also on merit.
The question of law raised is however left open.
.......................J (T.S. THAKUR) .......................J (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Mahabir Singh Date: 2014.10.18 13:12:50 IST Reason: .......................J (R. BANUMATHI) NEW DELHI DATED 17th OCTOBER, 2014 ITEM NO.26 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal Diary No(s). 26302/2014 CHIEF OF ARMY STAFF & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS EX.RECT.VIGHNE BALI RAM Respondent(s) (With appln. (s) for leave to appeal u/s 31(1) of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 and office report) Date : 17/10/2014 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI For Appellant(s) Mr. N.K. Kaul,ASG Mr. R. Balasubramanian,Adv.
Ms. Meenakshi Grover,Adv.
Mr. Santosh Kumar,Adv.
Ms. Aakanksha Kaul,Adv.
Mr. B. V. Balaram Das,Adv.
For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard.
There is an inordinate delay of 1130 days in the filing of this application for leave to appeal for which no cogent explanation is forthcoming from the petitioners to warrant our interference with the order impugned. That apart no substantial question of law of general/public importance arises for our consideration.
The prayer for condoning the delay is declined and the application for leave to appeal accordingly dismissed on the ground of limitation and also on merit.
The question of law raised is however left open.
(MAHABIR SINGH) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
(Signed order is placed on the file)