CaseMinister
CaseMinister › Judgments › Supreme Court › 2000 › Chhavi Kulavi v. Ganesh Chandra Mondal

Chhavi Kulavi v. Ganesh Chandra Mondal

Supreme Court of India · 14 December 2000

Court
Supreme Court of India
Decided
14 December 2000
Case no.
C.A. No. 7371 of 2000
Length
1 pages
Have a question about this judgment?

Ask our Legal AI about it on WhatsApp: free, no signup, in English or Hindi.

Write it first.

CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 7371 2000
PETITIONER:
CHHABI KULAVI & ANR.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
GANESH CHANDRA MONDAL
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 14/12/2000
BENCH:
M.B.Shah,, S.N.Variava

JUDGMENT

L.....I.........T.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T..J

JUDGMENT

S. N. VARIAVA, J.

Leave granted. This Appeal is against an Order dated 6th March, 2000, wherein the Application for Condonation of Delay in filing an Appeal has been dismissed. Briefly stated the facts are as follows: The Respondent had filed a title suit against the Appellants. That suit came to be decreed ex-parte. Thereafter the Appellants filed an Appeal which was filed in the wrong Court and was ultimately transferred and filed in the right Court. But by then there was a delay of approximately 2 1/2 years. The Application for condonation of delay has been dismissed by the impugned Order. In our view, there was sufficient cause for the delay. The Appellant’s husband was ill and became blind. Thereafter, it is the Advocate who has filed the Appeal in the wrong Court. For these causes the Appellants cannot be blamed. We, therefore, condone the delay in filing the Appeal. The High Court shall number the Appeal, if not already numbered and take it up for final hearing. We request the High Court to dispose off the Appeal on merits as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of six months. This Appeal stand disposed off as above. There will be no Order as to costs.@@

JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ

Ask CaseMinister about Chhavi Kulavi v. Ganesh Chandra Mondal

Your 24×7 legal assistant on WhatsApp answers with the judgments that apply, in English or Hindi. No signup needed.

Questions about this judgment, or a case like it?Ask on WhatsApp