Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Telangana State Waqf Board vs G Ramakishan on 4 August, 2023
Bench: A.S. Bopanna, M.M. Sundresh
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL No.4902-03 OF 2023
(arising out of SLP(C) Diary No(s). 23400/2023
TELANGANA STATE WAQF BOARD Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
G RAMAKISHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the appeal papers.
3. The respondent no.2 herein, has entered caveat. Since, the interest of the respondent nos. 1 to 6 is same as that of respondent no.2, and the respondent no.2 is represented by a learned senior counsel, we take note of the submissions put forth as being the submissions on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 6. The respondent nos.7 to 12 are the official respondents. Though shown as the contesting respondents, in the course adopted presently, they would have the opportunity of putting forth their contentions on merits before the High Court. In that view of the matter, for the present, we dispense the service Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Nisha Khulbey Date: 2023.08.08 16:10:46 IST of issue of notice to respondent nos. 7 to 12. Reason:
3. The appellant is assailing the order dated 17.04.2023 passed by the High Court whereby the High 2 Court has dismissed the IA No. 2/2023 in Writ Appeal No. 47/2023 seeking condonation of delay of 436 days in filing the appeal.
4. Consequently, the appeals are dismissed.
5. Though, the learned senior counsel for the respondents would seek to point out that a reference to the merits is also found in the impugned order, we are of the opinion that when the High court had declined to condone the delay, such observation as contained in paragraph-7, cannot be considered as a decision on merits on entertaining the appeal. In that view, the impugned order is to be construed only as an order dismissing the appeal on the ground of delay.
5. In that regard, having taken note of the it is the contention of the appellant herein that they were not parties to the said writ petitions from which appeal arose and even though, it is disputed by the other side, the fact remains that the matter is to be considered on merits inasmuch as valuable rights to the properties is involved. Therefore, taking into consideration all these aspects of the matter, the delay of 436 days in filing the appeal is condoned. The writ appeal no. 47/2023 is restored to the Board of the High Court of State of Telangana at Hyderabad to provide opportunity to all the parties to address their contentions on merits. All contentions in that regard are left open to be urged. 3
6. Further, the parties before us, shall now appear before the Registrar General of the High Court of Telangana and take instructions with regard to the date on which the matter would be listed before the Court and appear accordingly. So far as the remaining respondents, the High Court may expedite the notice and consider the matter as expeditiously as possible.
7. The appeals are accordingly disposed of along with the pending application(s) if any.
...................J. (A.S. BOPANNA) ...................J. (M.M. SUNDRESH) New Delhi 04th August, 2023 4 ITEM NO.27 COURT NO.7 SECTION XII-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 23400/2023 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 17-04-2023 in IA No. 2/2023 17-04-2023 in WA No. 47/2023 passed by the High Court For The State Of Telangana At Hyderabad) TELANGANA STATE WAQF BOARD Petitioner(s) VERSUS G RAMAKISHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) ( IA No.142624/2023-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.142627/2023-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING / CURING THE DEFECTS ) Date : 04-08-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH For Petitioner(s) Mr. K.parameshwar, AOR Mr. Abu Akram, Adv.
Ms. Arti Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Kanti, Adv.
Mr. Chinmay Kalgaonka, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Ramakrishnan Viraraghavan, Sr. Adv.
Mr. B. Laxman, AOR Mr. G Rajeshwar Rao, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned.
Leave granted.
The appeals are disposed of along with the pending application(s), if any, in terms of the signed order.
(NISHA KHULBEY) (DIPTI KHURANA) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(signed order is placed on the file)