Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.22 seconds)Ramlal, Motilal And Chhotelal vs Rewa Coalfields Ltd on 4 May, 1961
17. With regard to the period from the expiry of the period of limitation till 1st April, 1981 the explanation does not appear to be quite satisfactory. The question before us is whether the said delay in filing the appeal should be condoned or not. The principle has been laid down in several decisions of the Supreme Court, particularly, in Ramlal v. Rewa Coalfields Ltd., . The matter relates to a public charity in which public in general is interested and it appears that the public charity has undoubtedly suffered and has been suffering when placed in charge of a dealing assistant whose conduct has been sufficiently highlighted hereinabove to show in what way he has caused tremendous prejudice and hindrance to the filing of this appeal. It appears that full advantage has been taken of the absence of the Official Trustee on leave from Feb. 21, 1981 to Mar. 20, 1981 and the time was allowed to pass. We are of the view that the Official Trustee is not guilty of negligence or inaction in respect of the said period of delay and in a situation like this we should not go to-the extent' of saying that he is responsible for the acts of his employees. It is not the trustee but the trust itself which would otherwise suffer the 'consequences.
The Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980
The Punjab Tenancy Rules
The West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956.
1