Manu Markande & Anr vs The State & Ors on 19 March, 2025
8. In summary, the case of the respondent no.3 and 4 reveals that vide
order dated 14.01.2016 in FAO 114/2016, the Court allowed the application
under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC and directed the respondents herein to file
the amended written statement within six weeks, and the respondents herein
failed to comply with the said direction. Thus, he subsequently filed an
application for condonation of delay on 02.06.2016. The amended written
statement was eventually filed on 11.07.2016, resulting in an acknowledged
delay of more than 30 days beyond the six-week period stipulated in the
order dated 14.01.2016, and he prays for the same to be taken on record. On
the legal aspect, he places reliance on a decision of this court in Rachna
Signature Not Verified Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:PRIYA Digitally Signed
Signing Date:21.03.2025 By:PURUSHAINDRA
17:50:27 5 KUMAR KAURAV
Mediratta And Ors vs Girdhari Lal1 and the order dated 09.01.2012 passed
in FAO (OS) 12/2012 titled as Suhas Chakma v. South Asia Human Rights
Doc, whereby the appeal filed against South Asia Human Rights Doc.