1985 (2) TMI 278

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the registry on the 26th March, 1983. The appeal was posted for hearing on 30th October, 1984. It was brought to the notice of Shri S.C. Ukil, the learned Barrister who has appeared on behalf of the appellant that the appeal is hit by limitation. The learned Barrister had requested for adjournment and has stated that he intended to file an application for condonation of delay as per instruction of his client. In the interests of justice, the appeal was adjourned. The appellant has filed an application for condonation of delay duly verified before the notary public on the 13th November, 1984. Shri S.C. Ukil, the learned Barrister has appeared on behalf of the appellant. He has pleaded that the appeal could not be filed within the stipulated ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2 of the said application where the appellant has referred that he had referred the matter to the Advocate for opinion and the appellant had received the opinion after the High Court Puja holidays and it was opined that there was merit in the case. Thereafter, the appellant had referred the case to the Principal of the company for approval to prefer the revision application. He has referred to a judgment in the case of Titaghur Paper Mills Ltd. v Union of India reported in 1981 E.L.T. 27. The learned J.D.R. has pleaded that if the delay in filing the appeal is condoned, the substantial right of respondent will be affected. He has pleaded that the appellant's application for condonation of delay may be rejected. 3. Shri S.C. Ukil, t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the judgments of Calcutta High Court and Privy Council reported in AIR 1933 Cal. 462 and AIR 1941 Privy Council 6 (not cited by the parties). I would also like to observe that in condoning the delay, the Court should be very cautious as the substantial rights of the other party are affected. When the time for appealing is once passed, a very valuable right is secured to the successful litigant and the Court must therefore be fully satisfied of the justice on the ground on which the appellant seeks to obtain an extension of time for attacking the decree and thus perhaps decreeing the successful litigant of the advantages which he has attained - Karsondas v. Bai Gungabai, 30 Bom 329 (330); Sanghni v. Gopeswar, 12 CLJ 615 (617), Dund Bahadur ....