9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (9) TMI 484X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order per : B.J. Shethna, J. (Oral)]. Heard learned Counsel Shri Bharat Naik for the applicants-original petitioners. 2. The present application is filed by the applicants-original petitioners in above M.C.A. for condoning the gross delay of as many as 675 days. 3. The above M.C.A. is filed in above writ petition i.e. Special Civil Application No. 13706 of 2004 for reviewing and re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tored to the file by reviewing and recalling the order of this Court passed on 18-10-2004 : 1996 (11) SCC 353 2001 (6) SCC 176 AIR 1969 SC 575 2000 (7) SCC 372 5. It is true that substantial justice should be done and not the technical one as held by the Hon ble Supreme Court. At the same time in the case of P.K. Ramachandran v. The State of Kerala, reported in AIR 1998 SC 227, the Hon b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te having practice of hardly few months at the Bar and whatever arguments were advanced by the learned Advocate before the Court was carefully considered and having considered the arguments the petition was dismissed. 8. If the submission of Shri Naik was accepted that this Court had committed an error in dismissing the petition on 18-10-2004 as many important facts and aspects of the case were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
