CaseMinister
CaseMinister › Judgments › Supreme Court › 2008 › State of Kerala v. Wilson K.C.

State of Kerala v. Wilson K.C.

Supreme Court of India · 16 September 2008

Court
Supreme Court of India
Decided
16 September 2008
Case no.
C.A. No. 5679 of 2008
Bench
Tarun Chatterjee, Aftab Alam
Length
3 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.

NON
REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.5679 OF 2008
(Arising out of SLP©No.9532 of 2007)

State of Kerala & Anr.
….Appellants

Versus

Wilson K.C.& Ors.
….Respondents

ORDER

1.
Leave granted.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and final order dated 20th of March, 2007 in Writ Appeal No.2342 of 2006 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam by which the application for condonation of delay of 116 days in filing the aforesaid writ appeal was rejected.

3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the application for condonation of delay of 116 days and the explanation given by the State of Kerala, the appellant herein, and also the objections filed thereto, we are of the view that the appellants, namely, the State of Kerala have made out sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the writ appeal is restored to its original file. The Division Bench of the High Court is requested to dispose of the writ appeal after giving hearing to the parties and after passing a reasoned order in accordance with law preferably within six months from the date of communication of this order to it.

4. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. There will be no order as to costs.

..…………………….J.
[Tarun Chatterjee]

New Delhi; .……………………..J. September 16, 2008. [Aftab Alam]

Ask CaseMinister about State of Kerala v. Wilson K.C.

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