KUNDAN LAL Vs. SUBHASH CHANDER
LAWS(DLH)-2007-3-87
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on March 14,2007

KUNDAN LAL Appellant
VERSUS
SUBHASH CHANDER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

J.M. MALIK, J. - (1.) This order shall decide application moved under Order 22 Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC for substitution of legal representatives of the appellant. The said application is also accompanied by an application for condonation of delay in its filing.
(2.) The appellant expired on 7th June, 2004 The application under Order 22 rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC was moved on 26th July, 2004 The applicants have enumerated three causes for condonation of delay, firstly, the registry had raised certain objections and the application was required to be refiled, secondly there was communication gap and it entailed some time and lastly there were unavoidable circumstances such as removal of objections etc. The application is supported by an affidavit sworn in by Smt. Rita Arora, one of the legal representatives of the appellant.
(3.) The respondents have contested these applications. It is alleged that the application is hopelessly barred by time. The application gives no reason much less sufficient reason for late re-filing of the application under Order 22 Rule 3 CPC. The applicants have failed to explain the delay of over seven months. The mode of communication to those places where the legal representatives of the appellant reside, is very well established.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.