DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. RAJINDRA PROPERTIES AND INDUSTRIES
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Rajindra Properties and Industries
Click here to view full judgement.
Pradeep Nandrajog, J. -
(1.) FIRST appeal filed by DDA was delayed by 40 days. The appeal was accompanied by an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Learned Appellate Judge has opined that sufficient cause was not shown and hence delay in filing the appeal was not condoned. The result was that DDA's application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was dismissed. As a consequence the appeal was dismissed as time barred.
(2.) REALLY speaking DDA ought not to have filed a regular second appeal. The order which had to be challenged was the order dismissing application filed by DDA under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Order dismissing the first appeal was a consequential order dismissing the appeal as barred by limitation. Learned Counsel for the parties state that the instant appeal may be treated as a petition laying a challenge to the order dated 6.3.2007 dismissing application filed by DDA under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
(3.) THE appeal in question along with the application seeking delay to be condoned was filed on 13.7.2006. The judgment and decree which was challenged is dated 24.4.2006.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.