Full Text
Translation output
$-37&49 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
LPA 302/2019
CPKOCHHAR , â
Appellant
LPA 302/2019
CPKOCHHAR , â
Appellant
VERSUS
THECHAIRMAN,STATEBANKOFINDIA &ORS Respondents
LPA 261/2019
CPKOCHHAR , â
^ Appellant
CPKOCHHAR , â
^ Appellant
VERSUS
thechairman,statebankofINDIA &ORS Respondents
Present: Mr.R.K.Kapoor,Advocateforappellantin both items.
Mr RajivKapurwithMr.SourjyaDas,Advocatesforrespondent no.1 m both Items.
Present: Mr.R.K.Kapoor,Advocateforappellantin both items.
Mr RajivKapurwithMr.SourjyaDas,Advocatesforrespondent no.1 m both Items.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE JYOTISINGH
08.05.2019 The appeal being LPA 302/2019 is directed against the order dated
20.02.2019 by which a review petition filed by the appellant herein seeking recall ofthe order dated 12.12.2018 for restitution ofthe writ petition being
W.P.(C)6129/2002wasdismissed.Theappeal beingLPA261/2019is directed againstthe order dated 12.12.2018 by which restoration application being CM
APPL47226/2017in W.P.(C)6129/2002wasdismissed.
Earlier,theappellanthad alsofiled anLPA 261/2019in which notice was issued for23.07.2019.It may benoted thaton06.05.2019 when LPA 302/2019 was listed, we had directed that LPA 261/2019 be also listed today as it also arises betweenthesamepartiesoutofacommonorderdated 12.12.2018
Mr. Kapur, learned counsel for the respondent/SBl submits that the
2019:DHC:7538-DB
â jr appellant has been extremely careless in pursuing the matter and since the appelantwasnotrepresentedonthreedatesofhearing,thelearnedSingleJudge was left wtthno option but to dismiss thepetition. Mr.R.K. Kapoor, learned counse for theappellant,onthe otherhandsubmits that theappellanthasbeen
1igentypursuingthe writpetitionsince the date offiling,but it is only after the writpetition waslistedinthe category of 'RegularMatters' thathis office could not keep account of the same and it led to the dismissal of the writ petition. Counsel for the appellant submits that non-appearance was not mtentional andevenotherwise the appellant wouldhavenothingto gaininnot appearinginthematter,whichshehasbeenpursuingforpastmanyyears.
Wehaveheardlearnedcounsels fortheparties. Weare satisfied withthe explanationrenderedbylearnedcounselfortheappellant.Accordingly,boththe orders dated12.12.2018 and20.02.2019passedby thelearnedSingleJudgeof thiscourtaresetaside.Thewritpetitionisrestoredtoitsoriginalnumber.
Bothpartiessubmitthattheywillfileashortsynopsisnotexceedingthree pages together with copies ofjudgments, which they wish to rely upon. The matter would be taken up before the learned Single Judge in the categoiy of
^ AfterNoticeMiscellaneousMatter' on11.07.2019.
Boththese appeals standdisposedof.
Thedateof23.07.2019 fixedinLPA 261/2019 stands cancelled.
G.S.SISTANI, J MAY 08, 2019/ck JYOTISINGH,J
HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE JYOTISINGH
08.05.2019 The appeal being LPA 302/2019 is directed against the order dated
20.02.2019 by which a review petition filed by the appellant herein seeking recall ofthe order dated 12.12.2018 for restitution ofthe writ petition being
W.P.(C)6129/2002wasdismissed.Theappeal beingLPA261/2019is directed againstthe order dated 12.12.2018 by which restoration application being CM
APPL47226/2017in W.P.(C)6129/2002wasdismissed.
Earlier,theappellanthad alsofiled anLPA 261/2019in which notice was issued for23.07.2019.It may benoted thaton06.05.2019 when LPA 302/2019 was listed, we had directed that LPA 261/2019 be also listed today as it also arises betweenthesamepartiesoutofacommonorderdated 12.12.2018
Mr. Kapur, learned counsel for the respondent/SBl submits that the
2019:DHC:7538-DB
â jr appellant has been extremely careless in pursuing the matter and since the appelantwasnotrepresentedonthreedatesofhearing,thelearnedSingleJudge was left wtthno option but to dismiss thepetition. Mr.R.K. Kapoor, learned counse for theappellant,onthe otherhandsubmits that theappellanthasbeen
1igentypursuingthe writpetitionsince the date offiling,but it is only after the writpetition waslistedinthe category of 'RegularMatters' thathis office could not keep account of the same and it led to the dismissal of the writ petition. Counsel for the appellant submits that non-appearance was not mtentional andevenotherwise the appellant wouldhavenothingto gaininnot appearinginthematter,whichshehasbeenpursuingforpastmanyyears.
Wehaveheardlearnedcounsels fortheparties. Weare satisfied withthe explanationrenderedbylearnedcounselfortheappellant.Accordingly,boththe orders dated12.12.2018 and20.02.2019passedby thelearnedSingleJudgeof thiscourtaresetaside.Thewritpetitionisrestoredtoitsoriginalnumber.
Bothpartiessubmitthattheywillfileashortsynopsisnotexceedingthree pages together with copies ofjudgments, which they wish to rely upon. The matter would be taken up before the learned Single Judge in the categoiy of
^ AfterNoticeMiscellaneousMatter' on11.07.2019.
Boththese appeals standdisposedof.
Thedateof23.07.2019 fixedinLPA 261/2019 stands cancelled.
G.S.SISTANI, J MAY 08, 2019/ck JYOTISINGH,J
LPA 302/2019 &. Ant, 2019:DHC:7538-DB
JUDGMENT