Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4.       It is further submitted that the applicant/appellant thereafter referred the matter to its management, who directed that appeal be filed in the matter and that Mr.Nikhil Mehta, Advocate be appointed to file appeal for and on behalf of the applicant/appellant.  Advocate for the applicant/appellant found that documents to enable filing of the appeal were incomplete and that the complete set of documents be procured from the Advocate for the applicant/appellant practicing in the Trial Court for filing first appeal.  However, Advocate for the applicant/appellant practicing in the Trial Court did not have proper documents with exhibits and applicant/appellant was compelled to reconstruct the file from their own record.  Copy of reconstructed file was received by Advocate practicing before this Commission on 20/01/2014.  However, copies were not legible.  Having understood the exigency of delay occurred, Advocate Mr.Nikhil Mehta drafted and sent the appeal immediately for approval of the applicant/appellant on 29/01/2014 with a request that legible set of written version with all exhibits will be required for filing first appeal.  Appeal was approved with few changes.  First appeal was filed on 04/02/2014.  Delay is therefore, neither intentional nor deliberate.  Applicant/appellant has a very good case on merit and public funds are involved.  Therefore, delay of 91 days may be condoned in the interest of justice.