0

Application for condonation of delay in filing the patent appeal dismissed because of unsatisfactory reasons – Jharkhand high court

Application for condonation of delay in filing the patent appeal dismissed because of unsatisfactory reasons – Jharkhand high court

An application for condonation of delay of 398 days overlapping the period of limitation was dismissed by the two-judge bench of HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR and HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKAR BHANGRA in the case of the state of Jharkhand and Ors. Versus Sanjay Kumar Savita  (L.P.A. No. 317 of 2020) 

The application was filed under section 5 of the Limitation Act and states the reasons for the delay in filing the letter patent appeal and the application states that there was no deliberate or instant delay in filing the appeal it was due to covid -19 and nationwide lockdown which caused the delay.

The learned additional advocate general submitted the following precedents of “Esha Bhattacharjeev. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy” (2013) 12 SCC 649, “State of U.Pv. Harish Chandra” (1996) 9 SCC 309 and “State of Jharkhand v.Bahabiti Marandi” (2019) SCC OnLine Jhar 2614 to submit that a lenient view may be taken in the matter for condoning the delay in filling the L.P.A No.317 of 2020 and submitted that the application for obtaining the certified copy of the order was after the expiry of the period of limitation and clarified that the matter was continuously pursued with the learned Advocate General/Additional Advocate-General and the aforesaid plea taken by the appellant is not proper in as much as the Courts were open and the records are generally available and the council demanded to know the probable injury that can be caused to the appellant if the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act is not granted.

The nature of dispute involved in the present case and the court came to the opinion that there is nothing at stake for the appellant-State of Jharkhand and it is not even averred by the appellant that it was constantly following the matter and as submitted by learned counsel an application for obtaining a certified copy of the order dated 8th August 2019 was made only on 25th September 2020, that is to say, after a lapse of the period of limitation.

Therefore the court considered the following reasons and dismissed the application for condoning the delay.

Click here to read the judgment

Judgment reviewed by Naveen sharma

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat