Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 53 (0.79 seconds)Section 14 in The Limitation Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Section 5 in The Limitation Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
The Coinage Act, 2011
Raj Kumar Shivhare vs Assistant Director Of Enforcement, ... on 24 September, 2008
24. The issue deserves to be considered from another angle. By taking
advantage of the liberty given by the learned Single Judge of the Delhi High
Court, the appellants invoked the jurisdiction of the Bombay High Court under
Section 35 of the Act. However, while doing so, they violated the time limit
specified in order dated 26.7.2010 which, in turn, is based on paragraph 45 of
the judgment of this Court in Raj Kumar Shivhare v. Assistant Director,
Directorate of Enforcement (supra). Indeed, it is not even the case of the
appellants that they had filed appeals under Section 35 of the Act within 30
days computed from 26.7.2010. Therefore, the Division Bench of the Bombay
High Court rightly observed that even though the issue relating to jurisdiction
of the Delhi High Court to grant time to the appellants to file appeals is highly
33
debatable, the time specified in the order passed by the Delhi High Court cannot
be extended.
M/S. Consolidated Engineering ... vs The Principal Secretary (Irrigation ... on 3 April, 2008
19. The same issue was again considered by the three-Judge Bench in
Consolidated Engineering Enterprises v. Principal Secretary, Irrigation
Department (supra) to which reference has been made hereinabove. After
holding that Section 5 of the Limitation Act cannot be invoked for condonation
of delay, Panchal, J (speaking for himself and Balakrishnan, C.J.) observed: