The State of Jharkhand Thr. Dc Vs. Sandeep Tiwari and ors - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1024823
CourtJharkhand High Court
Decided OnAug-26-2013
AppellantThe State of Jharkhand Thr. Dc
RespondentSandeep Tiwari and ors
Excerpt:
inthehighcourtofjharkhandatranchi firstappealno.17of2009 thestateofjharkhand,through deputycommissioner,palamau appellant versus sandeeptiwari&others respondents coram: honblemr.justiced.n.upadhyay fortheappellants :mr.arvindkr.mehta,j.c.tog.p .1 fortherespondents :mr.nagmanitiwari,advocate 09/26.08.2013 i.a.no.452of2009hasbeenfiledtocondonethedelayof559daysin preferringthisappealagainstthejudgmentandawarddated10.05.2007and 25.05.2007,passedinlandacquisitioncaseno.15of2003. it is submitted that in making correspondence to the deputy commissionerandotherofficialsofthegovernmentofjharkhand,thedelay occurredinpreferringtheappeal.finally,afterobtainingtheopinionoflearned advocategeneralthisappealhasbeenpreferred.underthecircumstances,the delaymaybecondonedandtheappealmaybefixedforadmission. learnedcounselappearingfortherespondenthasopposedtheargument and submitted that such inordinate delay with such explanation cannot be condoned. iamnotsatisifedwiththegroundstakenini.a.no.452of2009,and therefore,thepetitionu/s5oflimitationactstandsrejected. consequently, instantfirstappealalsostandsdismissed. (d.n.upadhyay,j.) nkc
Judgment:

INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI FirstAppealNo.17of2009 TheStateofJharkhand,through DeputyCommissioner,Palamau Appellant Versus SandeepTiwari&Others Respondents CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.UPADHYAY FortheAppellants :Mr.ArvindKr.Mehta,J.C.toG.P .1 FortheRespondents :Mr.NagmaniTiwari,Advocate 09/26.08.2013 I.A.No.452of2009hasbeenfiledtocondonethedelayof559daysin preferringthisappealagainstthejudgmentandawarddated10.05.2007and 25.05.2007,passedinLandAcquisitionCaseNo.15of2003. It is submitted that in making correspondence to the Deputy CommissionerandotherofficialsoftheGovernmentofJharkhand,thedelay occurredinpreferringtheappeal.Finally,afterobtainingtheopinionoflearned AdvocateGeneralthisappealhasbeenpreferred.Underthecircumstances,the delaymaybecondonedandtheappealmaybefixedforadmission. Learnedcounselappearingfortherespondenthasopposedtheargument and submitted that such inordinate delay with such explanation cannot be condoned. IamnotsatisifedwiththegroundstakeninI.A.No.452of2009,and therefore,thepetitionu/s5ofLimitationActstandsrejected. Consequently, instantfirstappealalsostandsdismissed. (D.N.Upadhyay,J.) NKC