Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.18 seconds)Section 5 in The Limitation Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
The Limitation Act, 1963
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Rafiq & Anr vs Munshilal & Anr on 16 April, 1981
14. Though, it appears that since passing of the ex parte judgment and order
dated 25.05.2017, till 13.10.2017, the delay may be attributed to the counsel of
the petitioners, for not informing them about the passing of the ex parte decree
is a acceptable contention, which Mr. B. Chetri, the learned counsel for the
petitioners had raised, and the ratios laid down in the case law i.e. Rafiq &
Anr.(supra) referred by him supports his submission, yet, the remaining part
Page No.# 13/14
of the delay from 13.10.2017, till 05.04.2018, left unexplained.
Section 151 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 115 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Lala Mata Din vs A. Narayanan on 25 August, 1969
In the case of
Mata Din (supra), by the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that:-
Mahabir Singh vs Subhash & Ors on 12 October, 2007
In Mahabir Singh Vs. Subhash & Ors. reported in (2018) 1 SCC
358, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in paragraph Nos. 6 & 8, has held as under:
1