High CourtsSingle Bench(2015) 07 KAR CK 0204

S. Lakshmikanth vs The Managing Director, K.S.R.T.C. and Others

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 1 July 2015 · Citation: (2015) 3 KCCR 2463

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.N. Satyanarayana, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 10858 of 2013 (MV)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

2 paragraphs · 240 words

S.N. Satyanarayana, J—This appeal is by the claimant in MVC. No. 3369/10 on the file of MACT, Bengaluru. This appeal is filed with inordinate delay of 535 days. Hence, application in I.A. 1/13 is filed. Though this application is listed continuously for a period of 3 days, there is no representation on behalf of the appellant. Hence, this application is taken up today. On going through the application and the affidavit filed in support thereof, it is seen that the reasons stated is that the claimant was not able to give instructions to obtain certified copy before the Court in time. Hence there is delay. When the certified copy is looked into, it is seen that the judgment and award in MVC. No. 3369/10 is passed on 14.3.2012. Counsel on record has filed application to secure certified copy on 28.3.2012 i.e., within 14 days from the date of judgment. The certified copy is received on 3.4.2012. Therefore the averment made in the affidavit is a blatant lie. To get over the delay of 535 days in filing the appeal a white lie is uttered to see that sympathy of the Court is invoked and delay is condoned. In any event, on going through the affidavit it is clearly seen that it is a false affidavit. The delay is not satisfactorily explained.

2.

Hence application filed in I.A. 1/13 for condonation of delay is dismissed. Consequently the appeal is also dismissed.