Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.16 seconds)Shib Dayal And Anr. vs Jagannath Prasad on 7 February, 1922
9. I must confess that this is a border line case; but on the whole I am satisfied that there was material upon which the learned Judge could exercise his discretion in favour of the plaintiff. As I have said the plaintiff was not in Calcutta. If a very strict view be taken, then it could well be held that the plaintiff had ample time to make this application. But it appears to me that in cases of this kind the Court must take a reasonably liberal view. It must not be forgotten that the main cause for delay in the trial of a suit is the Court itself. Often the parties get ready and then have to wait years before the Court can hear them. In such circumstances I do not think that too strict a view should be taken of the conduct of the parties. This matter was considered by a Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court in the case of -- 'Shib Dayal v. Jagannath AIR 1922 All 490 (A). That was a case where the Court held that an honest mistake on the part of a litigant caused by erroneous advice given to him by his vakil in the district, by reason of which an appeal was not filed until the period of limitation therefor had expired, is a good ground for the application in favour of the would-be appellant of the provisions of Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act.
Kamiruddin Mallik vs Sm. Bishupriya Chowdhurani on 2 August, 1928
11. The matter was also considered by a Bench of this Court in -- 'Kamiruddin Mallik v. Sm. Bishupriya Chowdhurani . In that case a learned Judge applying the law very strictly had held a certain application to be out of time and that the delay could not be condoned. Discussing the matter Mukherji J., who delivered the judgment of the Bench observed:
1