Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CM(M) No. 567/2014 28th August , 2014 MRS. VALLARI C. ROBINSON ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. R.S.Rai, Adv.
THROUGH REV WALTER DAVID ITS PRESIDENT ..... Respondent
Through
To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)
JUDGMENT
1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the order of the first appellate court dated 20.3.2014 which has dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation by refusing to condone the delay of 11 years and 2 ½ months. Since the impugned order is a short order, I reproduce the same as under:- “ TCR is received. Heard on the application filed by the appellant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay of 11 years and 2 2014:DHC:4233 CMM 567/2014 ½ months in preferring the appeal against judgment dated 31.8.2002. In sum and substance, the delay in preferring the appeal is sought to be explained on the premise that after the passing of the said judgment, the execution petition had come to be filed by the DH and the appellant has been contesting the said execution proceedings under an erroneous advise. During the course of hearing, ld. Counsel for the DH points out that execution petition came to be filed only in August 2012, which is not disputed by ld. Counsel for the appellant. Delay, is beyond comprehension. No merit. Dismissed. Consequently, the appeal stands rejected. TCR be sent back. File be consigned to record room.”
2. I do not find any illegality in the impugned order for interfering with under Article 227 of the Constitution of India because contesting of execution proceedings will not give a right to file an appeal against the main judgment with delay of over 11 years.
3. Dismissed.
AUGUST 28, 2014 VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J. ib