2006 (9) TMI 484

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... None, for the Respondent. [Order per : B.J. Shethna, J. (Oral)]. -  Heard learned Counsel Shri Bharat Naik for the applicants-original petitioners. 2. The present application is filed by the applicants-original petitioners in above M.C.A. for condoning the gross delay of as many as 675 days. 3. The above M.C.A. is filed in above writ petition i.e. Special Civil Appl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....A be granted and the above main writ petition be restored to the file by reviewing and recalling the order of this Court passed on 18-10-2004 : 1996 (11) SCC 353 2001 (6) SCC 176 AIR 1969 SC 575 2000 (7) SCC 372 5. It is true that substantial justice should be done and not the technical one as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. At the same time in the case of P.K. Ramachandran ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....initially the applicant's petitioners had engaged a very raw junior Advocate having practice of hardly few months at the Bar and whatever arguments were advanced by the learned Advocate before the Court was carefully considered and having considered the arguments the petition was dismissed. 8. If the submission of Shri Naik was accepted that this Court had committed an error in dismissing ....