Search Results for "Section 5 Limitation Act"

44 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 44 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Second Appeal Against Abatement of Appeal Due to Procedural Lapses - Condonation of Delay Application Not Required for Setting Aside Abatement Under Order XXII Rule 9 CPC

The appellants, original plaintiffs in a suit for cancellation of sale deed and permanent injunction, filed Regular Civil Appeal No.160 of 2010 agains...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay at Goa Allows Writ Petition of an 85-Year-Old Fruit Vendor, Condoning Delay in Filing Review Petition Due to Old Age and Illness. The Court Held That Sufficient Cause Was Shown Under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and Directed the District Judge to Hear the Review on Merits.

The petitioner, Smt. Kashi Babuli Chari, an 85-year-old widow and fruit vendor, filed a writ petition challenging the order of the learned District Ju...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Restoration of Appeal Dismissed in Default Due to Advocate's Absence, Imposing Costs on Appellants. Mistake of Advocate Should Not Prejudice Party; Section 5 of Limitation Act Applied to Advance Substantial Justice.

The appellants, Devkisan Onkardas Bhutada and Gopal Devkisan Bhutada, had filed Regular Civil Appeal No. 80/08 against the judgment and decree in Regu...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Condonation of Delay and Substitution of Legatee in Civil Suit. Trial Court's Discretion to Allow Substitution Based on Alleged Will Upheld as Right to Sue Survives and Validity of Will is a Triable Issue.

The petitioner, defendant in a pending civil suit, challenged the trial court's order dated 8.2.2012 condoning delay and allowing substitution of the ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Property Suit — Concurrent Findings of Fact Not Disturbed Under Section 100 CPC. Appellant failed to show any substantial question of law arising from concurrent findings of courts below regarding possession and title of suit property.

The case involves a second appeal filed by Sou. Sheetal Ulhas Dangi, who was the original defendant no.22, against the judgment and decree passed by t...