Case Note & Summary
The petitioners filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 25-2-2014 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in Revision No.175/TENB/2000. The Tribunal had rejected the petitioners' application for condonation of delay of 2 years and 8 months in filing an application to bring the legal representatives of the original non-applicant, Smt. Gangubai Shridhar Kulkarni (deceased), on record. Additionally, the Tribunal also rejected the application for condonation of delay of 98 days in bringing the name of Umakant, one of the legal representatives of Smt. Gangubai, on record. The petitioners, who were the applicants in the revision, sought to substitute the legal heirs of the deceased respondent. The Tribunal found that the explanation offered for the delay was not sufficient and dismissed the condonation applications. The High Court, in its judgment, noted that the Tribunal had considered the material on record and exercised its discretion. The Court found no perversity or error in the Tribunal's order and held that the order was just and proper. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Tribunal's decision. The Court also noted that the petition was devoid of merits and no interference was warranted under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Condonation of Delay - Sufficient Cause - Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 - The petitioners sought condonation of delay of 2 years and 8 months in filing an application to bring legal representatives of the deceased respondent on record in a revision before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal. The Tribunal rejected the application holding that the explanation for delay was not satisfactory. The High Court upheld the rejection, finding no perversity or error in the Tribunal's exercise of discretion. Held that the Tribunal's order was just and proper and did not warrant interference under Article 227 of the Constitution. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal erred in rejecting the application for condonation of delay of 2 years and 8 months in filing an application to bring legal representatives of the deceased non-applicant on record.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the order of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal dated 25-2-2014 rejecting the applications for condonation of delay.
Law Points
- Condonation of delay
- Sufficient cause
- Legal representatives
- Substitution
- Limitation
Case Details
2016 LawText (BOM) (11) 49
Writ Petition No.1817 of 2014
Shri Vipul Bhise for Petitioners, Shri Sameer Sohoni for Respondent No.1
Devidas s/o Pandurang Lahore and others
Smt. Gangubai w/o Shridhar Kulkarni (deceased) through legal heirs
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal rejecting applications for condonation of delay in bringing legal representatives on record.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought to set aside the Tribunal's order and allow the condonation of delay applications.
Filing Reason
The Tribunal rejected the petitioners' applications for condonation of delay of 2 years and 8 months and 98 days in filing substitution applications.
Previous Decisions
The Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in Revision No.175/TENB/2000 rejected the condonation applications by order dated 25-2-2014.
Issues
Whether the Tribunal erred in rejecting the condonation of delay application for 2 years and 8 months.
Whether the Tribunal erred in rejecting the condonation of delay application for 98 days.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the delay was due to ignorance and other reasons, and should be condoned.
Respondents opposed the condonation, stating that the explanation was not sufficient.
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal's discretion in rejecting condonation of delay applications was not perverse or erroneous; the explanation for delay of 2 years and 8 months was not sufficient; no interference under Article 227 warranted.
Judgment Excerpts
The challenge in this petition is to the order dated 25-2-2014 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, in Revision No.175/TENB/2000, rejecting the application for condonation of delay of 2 years and 8 months caused in filing an application for bringing the names of legal representatives of the original non-applicant Smt. Gangubai Shridhar Kulkarni on record.
The order also rejects the application for condonation of delay of 98 days caused in filing an application for bringing the name of the legal representative Umakant, one of the legal representatives of Smt. Gangubai.
The Tribunal has considered the material on record and has exercised its discretion. The order passed by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for any interference in the writ jurisdiction.
Procedural History
The petitioners filed Revision No.175/TENB/2000 before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal. During the pendency of the revision, the original non-applicant Smt. Gangubai died. The petitioners filed applications to bring her legal representatives on record with a delay of 2 years and 8 months, and also for one legal representative Umakant with a delay of 98 days. The Tribunal rejected both condonation applications on 25-2-2014. The petitioners then filed the present writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench.
Acts & Sections
- Limitation Act, 1963: Section 5
- Constitution of India: Article 227
