Eyeglobal Technologies Pvt Ltd. Vs. Ispat Industries Ltd. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
the court : this matter was adjourned earlier on the ground of non appearance of the respondent. we directed the appellant to serve a further notice on the respondent and fixed the matter today to enable the respondent to appear before us. in spite of service of notice, none appears on behalf of the respondent to oppose the prayer of the appellant. this application has been filed for condo nation of delay of 58 days in filing the appeal. the grounds for condo nation of delay which have been sought to be made have been stated in paragraph-3 of the application, which is reproduced herein below: the appellant states that the appellants are based in mumbai and has no office in kolkata. the earlier advocate-on-record forwarded the certified copy of the said order on 16th june, 2010 and the same was received by the appellant on 18th june, 2010. thereafter, the appellant based in mumbai, sought legal opinion on the said order from the advocates in mumbai. the appellant was not satisfied with the work done by the earlier advocate and therefore was searching for some other advocate in kolkata to appear on behalf of the appellant. thereafter, the appellant instructed the present advocate to prepare an appeal against the said order. the appeal was prepared and forwarded to the appellant but due to inter departmental approvals, it took considerable time in approving and finalizing the same. due to aforesaid reasons, there was delay of 58 days in filing the appeal. in our considered opinion, the cause that has been made in the aforesaid paragraph does not show any cogent reason to condone the delay of 58 days in filing the present appeal. in our considered opinion, the grounds stated in the said paragraph are devoid of particulars and we only direct the appellant to file a supplementary affidavit stating therein full particulars thereof. such affidavit should be filed on the reopening day and a copy of the same shall be served on the respondent. the respondent shall be at liberty to file affidavit-in-opposition within a week thereafter. reply, if any, be filed within three days thereafter, and the matter will appear in the list ten days after reopening. all parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this order on the usual undertakings. urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.

Judgment:
The Court : This matter was adjourned earlier on the ground of non appearance of the respondent. We directed the appellant to serve a further notice on the respondent and fixed the matter today to enable the respondent to appear before us.

In spite of service of notice, none appears on behalf of the respondent to oppose the prayer of the appellant.

This application has been filed for condo nation of delay of 58 days in filing the appeal. The grounds for condo nation of delay which have been sought to be made have been stated in paragraph-3 of the application, which is reproduced herein below:

The appellant states that the appellants are based in Mumbai and has no office in Kolkata. The earlier Advocate-on-Record forwarded the certified copy of the said order on 16th June, 2010 and the same was received by the appellant on 18th June, 2010.

Thereafter, the appellant based in Mumbai, sought legal opinion on the said order from the advocates in Mumbai. The appellant was not satisfied with the work done by the earlier Advocate and therefore was searching for some other advocate in Kolkata to appear on behalf of the appellant.

Thereafter, the appellant instructed the present advocate to prepare an appeal against the said order. The appeal was prepared and forwarded to the appellant but due to inter departmental approvals, it took considerable time in approving and finalizing the same. Due to aforesaid reasons, there was delay of 58 days in filing the appeal.

In our considered opinion, the cause that has been made in the aforesaid paragraph does not show any cogent reason to condone the delay of 58 days in filing the present appeal. In our considered opinion, the grounds stated in the said paragraph are devoid of particulars and we only direct the appellant to file a supplementary affidavit stating therein full particulars thereof. Such affidavit should be filed on the reopening day and a copy of the same shall be served on the respondent.

The respondent shall be at liberty to file affidavit-in-opposition within a week thereafter. Reply, if any, be filed within three days thereafter, and the matter will appear in the list ten days after reopening.

All parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this order on the usual undertakings.

Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.