Mukhtiar Singh Vs. Baghal Singh & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Civil Miscellaneous Petitions Nos.
4157-59 of 1987. (In CA No.1401/77).
4157-59 of 1987. (In CA No.1401/77).
Petitioner: Mukhtiar Singh
Respondent: Baghal Singh & Ors.
Apeal: Civil Miscellaneous Petitions Nos.
4157-59 of 1987. (In CA No.1401/77).
4157-59 of 1987. (In CA No.1401/77).
Judges: A.P. SEN & B.C. RAY, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Jul 20, 1987
Head Note:
LIMITATION ACT, 1963:
Section 5 – Failure on the part of the appellant to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased ~4~ Abatement of appeal – Application for condonation of delay for setting aside the abtement of appeal – No cause made out much less sufficient cause within the meaning of s.5 – The appeal dismissed as abated.
JUDGEMENT:
O R D E R
1. The appeal has abated due to the failure on the part of the appellant to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased respondent no.1 Baghal singh. On the last occasion we heard learned counsel for the parties and were not satisfied that the applications made by the appellant for condonation of delay and for setting aside the abatement of the appeal, made out sufficient cause under S.5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for such condonation. We afforded an opportunity to the appellant to file a further and better affidavit. The appellant has since filed an additional affidavit. We have gone through the same. We are not satisfied that the applications as made together with the additional affidavit make out any cause much less sufficient cause within the meaning of S.5 of the Limitation Act.
2. We accordingly dismiss the appeal as abated. There will be no order as to costs.
Appeal dismissed.
1. The appeal has abated due to the failure on the part of the appellant to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased respondent no.1 Baghal singh. On the last occasion we heard learned counsel for the parties and were not satisfied that the applications made by the appellant for condonation of delay and for setting aside the abatement of the appeal, made out sufficient cause under S.5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for such condonation. We afforded an opportunity to the appellant to file a further and better affidavit. The appellant has since filed an additional affidavit. We have gone through the same. We are not satisfied that the applications as made together with the additional affidavit make out any cause much less sufficient cause within the meaning of S.5 of the Limitation Act.
2. We accordingly dismiss the appeal as abated. There will be no order as to costs.
Appeal dismissed.
