Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.33 seconds)Ajit Singh Thakur Singh And Anr. vs State Of Gujarat on 9 January, 1981
16. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajit
Singh Thakur Singh and Another Vs. State of
Gujarat1 at paragraph No.6 observed as follows:
Ramlal, Motilal And Chhotelal vs Rewa Coalfields Ltd on 4 May, 1961
17. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case in
Ramlal, Motilal and Chhotelal Vs. Rewa Coalfields
Limited2 in the context of making interpretation of
Section 5 of the Limitation Act with reference to the word
"within such period" has observed at paragraph No.8 as
follows:
Shivamma (Dead) By Lrs. vs Karnataka Housing Board on 24 August, 2022
18. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case between
Shivamma (Dead) by LRs., Vs. Karnataka Housing
Board & Others3 were pleased to deal with exhaustively
on the jurisprudence of law of limitation. The Hon'ble
Supreme Court with reference to various judgments
delivered earlier has interpreted "what is sufficient cause"
Section 100 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
State Of Uttar Pradesh vs M/S Satish Chand Shivhare And Brothers on 4 April, 2022
7) State of Uttar Pradesh and Others Vs. Satish
Chand Shivhare and Brothers - 2022 SCC
OnLine SC 2151
Amalendu Kumar Bera & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal on 22 March, 2013
In Amalendu Kumar Bera v. State of
West Bengal reported in (2013) 4 SCC 52 this
Court held that although a liberal approach is to be
adopted in matters of condonation of delay, such
indulgence cannot be extended in cases where the
delay is attributable to serious laches or negligence
on the part of the State. Delays as a result of the
official business of the government requires its
pedantic approach from public justice perspective. It
held that delay should not be condoned mechanically
in the absence of "sufficient cause" merely because
the party happens to be the State. The relevant
observations read as under: -
Union Of India & Ors vs Nripen Sarma on 15 February, 2011
In a recent decision
in Union of India v. Nripen Sarma [(2013) 4
SCC 57 : AIR 2011 SC 1237] the matter
came up against the order passed by the
High Court condoning the delay in filing the
appeal by the appellant Union of India. The
High Court refused to condone the delay on
the ground that the appellant Union of India
took their own sweet time to reach the
conclusion whether the judgment should be
appealed or not. The High Court also
expressed its anguish and distress with the
way the State conducts the cases regularly in
filing the appeal after the same became
operational and barred by limitation.
State Of U.P.Thr.Exe.Engineer & Anr vs Amar Nath Yadav on 10 January, 2014
195. The view taken in the decision of
Postmaster General (supra) also came to be
endorsed and followed by this Court in State of U.P.
v. Amar Nath Yadav reported in (2014) 2 SCC