Madhya Pradesh High Court
Maksood Ulhak vs Jugalkishor on 2 November, 2023
Author: Dwarka Dhish Bansal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
ON THE 2 nd OF NOVEMBER, 2023
MISC. CIVIL CASE No. 2534 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
1. MAKSOOD ULHAK S/O HAKKAN ULHAK, AGED
ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O GADI MOHALLA,
BAZARIYA NO 1, DAMOH DISTRICT DAMOH
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. DEAD(DELETED)
3. SHRIRIN W/O LATE SIRAJ KHAN, AGED ABOUT 24
YEAR S, R/O GADI MOHULLA BAZARIYA NO. 1
DAMOH DISTRICT DAMOH (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. SHAMREEN D/O LATE SIRAJ KHAN, AGED ABOUT
2 YEARS, OCCUPATION: MINOR THROUGH
MOTHER SHIRIN WD/O LATE SIRAJ KHAN AGED
ABOUT 24 YEARS R/O GADI MOHULLA BAZARIYA
NO. 1 DAMOH DISTRICT DAMOH (MADHYA
PRADESH)
5 SAHIL S/O LATE SIRAJ KHAN OCCUPATION: 6
MONTH MINOR THROUGH MOTHER SHIRIN
WD/O LATE SIRAJ KHAN AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
R/O GADI MOHULLA BAZARIYA NO. 1 DAMOH
DISTRICT DAMOH (MADHYA PRADESH)
6. DEAD(DELETED)
7. SAHIB S/O MAKSOOD ULHAK, AGED ABOUT 22
YEAR S, R/O GADI MOHULLA BAZARIYA NO. 1
DAMOH DISTRICT DAMOH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANTS
(BY SHRI MOHD. SIDDEEQUE, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. JUGALKISHOR S/O TOHANLAL DRIVER R/O
PHUTERA WARD DAMOH (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. M/S SARVESHWAR ROAD CAREER PRO. HARI
PALIWAL R/O PRATAP MARKET DAMOH NAKA
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KUMARI PALLAVI
SINHA
Signing time: 11/4/2023
12:34:42 PM
2
JABALPUR DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. M A N A G E R THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LTD. OFFICE NEAR STATION SQUARE
DAMOH DISTRICT DAMOH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
This application coming on for orders this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
Heard on I.A. No.16950/2023, which is an application for condonation of
delay filed in MCC for restoration of M.A. No.3594/2013.
2. Registry has reported this MCC to be barred by 3518 days.
3. Supporting the averments made in the application, learned counsel submits
that appellants/claimants preferred M.A. No.3594/2013 and this Court issued
notices but the counsel for the applicants/appellants did not submit the process
fee within the requisite period, resultantly the case was listed under common
conditional order and further 6 weeks time was granted vide order dtd.
18.12.2013 but the compliance was not made and resultantly the miscellaneous
appeal was dismissed.
4. For restoration of the miscellaneous appeal, a MCC No.3504/2015 was
filed, which vide order dtd. 08.12.2015 was allowed on payment of cost of
Rs.500/- to be deposited in the account of Library fund of the High Court of
Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur within a period of two weeks, but this order was
also not complied with, resultantly the Registry of this Court vide its order
dtd.18.04.2016 treated the miscellaneous appeal to have been dismissed and
now the present MCC has been filed on 19.10.2023 for restoration of
miscellaneous appeal. Learned counsel concedes that till now the order dtd.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KUMARI PALLAVI
SINHA
Signing time: 11/4/2023
12:34:42 PM
08.12.2015 directing deposition of cost of Rs. 500/- has not been complied
with. Learned counsel submits that the applicants came to know about dismissal
of the misc. appeal when they contacted to their counsel at Jabalpur and
submits that the sufficient cause mentioned under Section 5 of the Limitation
Act should be considered liberally. With the aforesaid submissions he prays for
allowing the application for condonation of delay.
5. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and perused the record.
6. Bare perusal of the application shows that it is very sketchy and does not
give any explanation about the long delay and reason of non compliance of the
orders passed by this Court firstly in miscellaneous appeal and then in MCC
No.3504/2015 decided on 08.12.2015 is not satisfactory.
7. The Supreme Court in the case of Pundlik Jalam Patil vs. Executive
Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project and another (2008) 17 SCC 448, has
observed that the Court cannot enquire into belated and stale claims on the
ground of equity. Delay defeats equity. The Courts help those who are vigilant
and "do not slumber over their rights". The aforesaid judgment has further been
followed recently in the case of Majji Sannemma @ Sanyasirao vs. Reddy
Sridevi and Others AIR 2022 SC 332.
8. As such, there being no reasonable or proper explanation of 3518 days
delay in filing of the application for restoration of miscellaneous appeal
No.3594/2013, the I.A No.16950/2023 deserves to be and is hereby
dismissed.
9. Resultantly, the MCC is also dismissed.
10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand dismissed.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KUMARI PALLAVI
SINHA
Signing time: 11/4/2023
12:34:42 PM
(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL)
JUDGE
Pallavi
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KUMARI PALLAVI
SINHA
Signing time: 11/4/2023
12:34:42 PM
