Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2010 (10) TMI 1036

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... urt of Allahabad or to restore the order dated 24.02.1992 passed by the Additional District Judge, Allahabad. By the impugned judgment and order dated 28.02.2006 the Allahabad High Court has set aside and quashed the order dated 24.02.1992 passed by the Additional District Judge, Allahabad in Misc. Case no. 494 of 1991. 3. The respondent herein filed suit no. 508 of 1983 before the Additional Civil Judge, Allahabad against the appellants for the relief of declaration that she was also one of the owners and co-sharers in the property constituting a house numbering 172, Lookerganj, Allahabad and her name should also be shown as one of the purchasers of the said house in dispute in the sale deed alleged to have been executed in their favour .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... herefore, appropriately at the time of passing of the order, the jurisdiction was with the District Court. The High Court, therefore, passed an order that it would be open to the defendant to move an application for condonation of delay before the District Judge. 6. In terms of the aforesaid order of the High Court, the appellants moved an application before the Additional District Judge, Allahabad under Section 5 read with Section 14 of the Limitation Act [for short the Act ] and an appeal was registered as appeal no. 494 of 1991. The respondent herein filed an objection to the application filed by the appellants under Section 5 read with Section 14 of the Limitation Act contending inter alia that the appellants herein did not act in g .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e the aforesaid objections taken by the respondent, the Additional District Judge allowed the said application by the order dated 24.02.1992. In the order dated 28.02.2006 the High Court held that the order passed by the Additional District Judge was incorrect and unjustified as this was not a case for grant of indulgence under Section 14 of the Act as it could not have been said that the appellants herein acted in good faith or with due diligence in order to get the benefit of Section 14 of the Act. Since the aforesaid order is challenged in the present appeal and since notice was issued pursuant to which the respondent has also entered appearance, we heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties at length. 10.The counsel appearin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rdance with law which was tried and decided. Since the aforesaid order was without jurisdiction as the District Court did not have pecuniary jurisdiction a writ petition was filed in the High Court by the respondent which was entertained. Since during the pendency of the said writ petition in the High Court the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Court was increased from ₹ 20,000/- to ₹ 5 lacs, therefore, the High Court held that now an appeal would lie before the District Court and, therefore, the same could be filed with an application for condonation of delay before the District Judge. 12.The appellants moved the said application under Section 5 read with Section 14 of the Limitation Act. At the time of hearing of the s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ligence as would be apparent from the fact that they initially failed to pursue the suit in right earnest, having failed to appear and contest the suit, due to which an ex-parte decree had to be passed by the court. Even thereafter, they failed to file the appeal in the proper forum, which was brought to their notice right at the initial stage by the respondent's filing of an objection. Despite the said fact, they did not take any step to withdraw the same and continued with the proceedings which was void ab initio and without jurisdiction and also obtained an order in their favour. Even before the High Court, where the impugned order was passed the appellants did not appear on the date of arguments or even on the previous dates. Absenc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates