Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 1 of 1 (0.17 seconds)

The Deputy Regional Director, E.S.I. ... vs M/S. K.A.S. Sons, A Firm Represented By ... on 29 September, 2000

Mr. Gupta has, then, referred 2008 SCCR 542 Kamlesh Babu and ors appellant v/s Lajput Raj Sharma & ors Respondent 2009 (2) Supreme 784 S B I v/s M/S B.S. Agriculture Industries. In 2008 SCCR 542. It has been held that the court is duty bound to dismiss a suit or an appeal or an application, made after the prescribed period, although, limitation is not set as a defence. This a legal proposition nobody can dispute. In the given case, this authority is not applicable. Similarly in 2005 (7) Supreme 467 a proposition of law has been laid down that a complaint must be dismissed which has been filed after the limitation period and the complainant does not account for the delay. In 2009 (2) Supreme 784 it has been held that if the complaint is barred by time and yet the Consumer Forum decides the same on merits, the Forum would be committing the illegality.
Madras High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 5 - D Murugesan - Full Document
1