AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
Misc.A.No.71/2025 is filed for condoning the delay of 82 days in re-presenting the restoration application in AIR (SA) 1477/2023.
Misc.A.No. 72/2025 is filed for condoning the delay of 18 days in filing the restoration application for restoring the IA 48/2024 in AIR (SA) 1477/2023.
Misc. A.No. 73/2025 is filed for restoring the IA 48/2024 in AIR (SA) 1477/2023. The said IA 48/2024 is filed to condone the delay of 275 days in filing the appeal.
It appears that starting from the filing of the appeal, there is a delay at every stage. Possession notice alone was challenged in TSA 9/2022. Main appeal is filed against the order passed in TSA 9/2022 by the learned Presiding officer, DRT-II, Chennai on 13.01.2023 dismissing the securitization application filed to set aside the possession notice dated 03.08.2021.
Learned counsel for the respondent objected the applications on the ground that starting from filing of the appeal, there is a delay at every stage.
Considered the rival submissions and perused the records.
As recorded above, the very appeal is filed along with an application to condone the delay of 275 days in filing the appeal and that application was dismissed for non-prosecution on 07.03.2025. Then Misc. Appln. No.73/2025 is filed for restoring the IA 48/2024 and Misc.Appln. No.72/2025 is filed for condoning the delay of 18 days in filing the restoration application for restoring the IA 48/2024. Misc. Appln. No. 71/2025 is filed for condoning the delay of 82 days in re-presenting the restoration application in AIR (SA) 1477/2023. Thus, it is clear that the petitioner was all along not vigilant in prosecuting the appeal starting from filing of the appeal with the delay of 275 days allowing it to be dismissed for non-prosecution and then filed application with the delay for restoration, re-presentation etc. No valid grounds have been stated for condoning the delay all around and therefore, this Tribunal is not inclined to condone the delay.
In this view of the matter, Misc. Appln.Nos. 71/2025, 72/2025 and 73/2025 are dismissed. Consequently, appeal is rejected. Parties shall bear their own costs. Pending IAs, if any, shall stand closed.