Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Limitation Act, 1963

999 judgments · newest first · showing 1–200

SAKHARAM S/O RANGNATH KULKARNIversusSHIVAJI NAGORAO JADHAV AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant filed a civil application seeking condonation of a 5,423‑day delay in filing an appeal against a 2007 judgment concerning a trust. He claimed to be a member of the trust and therefore an affected person with standing to appeal. The respondents contended that the applicant had no …

BALASAHEB MURLIDHAR AAHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Withdrawn

The applicant, Balasaheb Murlidhar Aaher, mistakenly filed a criminal revision application before the Bombay High Court instead of a criminal appeal before the Sessions Court. He sought permission to withdraw the revision and to be allowed to file the proper appeal, also requesting that any delay …

FATRU ALIKHAN KHADAR ALIKHAN LASHKARI THROUGH LRS JULEKHABI FATRU ALI KHAN AND OTHERSversusISHRAT ALIKHAN KHADAR ALIKHAN LASHKARI THROUGH LRS KHAMRAMUNNISA ISHRAT ALI LASHKARI AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners challenged a judgment dated 31‑August‑2019 in which a Junior Division Civil Judge set aside an ex‑parte decree in a partition suit (Civil Suit No.141/2002). The original suit had proceeded ex‑parte against 27 defendants, some of whom were not properly served. The respondents filed …

ISMAIL BAIG MIRZA ISAM BAIG AND OTHERSversusBABURAO BAPURAO WARKAD

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners, a group of family members, claimed that a 4‑acre agricultural inam land in Aurangabad was illegally sold in 1968 without the prior permission required under the Hyderabad Abolition of Inams and Cash Grants Act, 1954. They sought cancellation of the sale deed and mutation under …

FATRU ALIKHAN KHADAR ALIKHAN LASHKARI THROUGH LRS JULEKHABI FATRU ALI KHAN AND OTHERSversusISHRAT ALIKHAN KHADAR ALIKHAN LASHKARI THROUGH LRS KHAMRAMUNNISA ISHRAT ALI LASHKARI AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners challenged a judgment dated 31‑08‑2019 in which a Junior Division Civil Judge set aside an ex‑parte decree in a partition suit (Civil Suit No.141/2002). They argued that the decree should not have been vacated because the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC was filed 85 days …

SHEHNAZ BEGUM AKBARKHAN AND ORSversusKHALEDA BEGUM GULAM AHMED KHAN ORS

DISMISSED

The applicants filed a civil revision challenging the trial court's order rejecting their application to dismiss a suit on grounds of limitation and improper valuation. They argued that the suit seeking cancellation of a 1997 relinquishment deed was filed within the three‑year period prescribed by …

UTTAM AGATRAO BHOSALE AND ORSversusSAHAJI AGATARAO BHOSALE

Disposed Off

The respondents filed a partition suit which was dismissed, and their subsequent appeal was dismissed for default. They later filed a Civil Miscellaneous Application seeking condonation of a 10‑month, 27‑day delay in applying for restoration of that appeal. The District Court condoned the delay, …

MADHUKAR MAHADEV PATILversusSANGLI ZILLA MADHYAWARTI SAHAKARI BANK LTD.

Rejected

Madhukar Mahadev Patil, a former bank employee, sought an extension of time to file a civil suit after his case in the Cooperative Court was dismissed and he was directed to approach the Civil Court within six weeks to avail the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act. He claimed his old age and …

JAYMALA NAVALKISHOR DIDIversusBALWANT SHRIRANG DEVKAR

Dismissed

The petitioner challenged a trial court order refusing to condone a delay of over three years in filing an application to set aside an ex parte decree in a suit for specific performance of a land sale contract. She claimed the delay was due to her husband’s terminal illness, her own health issues, …

Sambhaji Gopalrao Mane DECEASEDversusSuresh Vardhanna Rai

Allowed

The applicants filed an interim application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, seeking condonation of a delay of three years and 320 days in filing a second appeal against a 2022 judgment. They explained the delay was due to the illness and subsequent death of a key applicant. The …

DAYANAND BASAPPA UMBARJEversusVIKAS NINGAPPA HANGANDI AND ANR

Disposed off as Withdrawn

The petitioner filed a criminal writ petition seeking quash of an order dated 05.03.2021 passed by the JMFC, Solapur, and to discharge the accused in complaint SCC No. 2234 of 2020. The petitioner later sought to withdraw the petition and requested liberty to file a criminal revision under Section …

PIYUSH PANDURANG PAWARversusMEGHA PRADIP AGRAWAL AND ANR

Disposed off as Withdrawn

The applicant, Piyush Pandurang Pawar, filed an application for leave to appeal before the Bombay High Court, Circuit Bench at Kolhapur, against Megha Pradip Agrawal and another. The applicant's counsel sought permission to withdraw the application in light of the Supreme Court judgment in Celestium …

DIVYA RAJESH REVANKAR AND OTHERSversusNAGESH VYANKATRAMAN REVANKAR AND OTHERS

Dismissed as Withdrawn

The petitioners sought to withdraw their writ petition and obtain liberty to file a statutory appeal under Section 29 of the P.W.D.V. Act, 2005 against an order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ichalkaranji. The respondents argued that the petition was filed beyond the limitation period for …

M/S. BHANDUP ESTATE AND ORS.versusINDUBAI RAJARAM OHOL AND ORS.

Disposed Off

The petitioners, an Association of Persons called Bhandup Estate, challenged a consent decree dated 5 April 1982 that had transferred ownership of 33 acres of land in Bhandup to Rajaram Sakharam Ohol on the basis of alleged adverse possession. They claimed the decree was procured fraudulently by the …

M/S. BHANDUP ESTATE AND ORS.versusINDUBAI RAJARAM OHOL AND ORS.

Disposed Off

The petitioners, an Association of Persons called Bhandup Estate, challenged a consent decree dated 5 April 1982 that had transferred ownership of 33 acres of land in Bhandup to Rajaram Sakharam Ohol on the basis of alleged adverse possession. They claimed the decree was procured fraudulently by the …

SHRI SHASHIKANT ARJUN JADHAVversusGOKUL VITHAL JADHAV

Dismissed

The appellants filed a suit for specific performance of a 2008 Agreement for Sale in which the respondent agreed to sell land for Rs.1,55,000, of which Rs.1,00,000 was paid. The land required permission from a competent authority for alienation, which the respondent allegedly refused to obtain, …

IndiaversusChugoku Marine Paints S PTE Ltd

DISPOSED OFF

The Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. (SCIL) contracted with Chugoku Marines Paints S PTE Ltd for marine paints, invoicing USD 82,970.28 which SCIL claimed to have paid, but the payment was fraudulently diverted. The dispute was referred to arbitration, and a sole arbitrator issued an award on 30 …

RAMESH DHANRAJ MURPANAversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Disposed off as Withdrawn

The petitioner, Sonali Milind Patil, filed a criminal writ petition challenging an order dated 4 November 2023 that issued process. Respondent No.2, the original complainant, argued that an alternate remedy existed to contest the order. The petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition, seeking …

WELLGROOMED VENTUREversusDR KAMATS HOSPITAL

DISMISSED

The applicants, Wellgroomed Venture, entered into a 2014 agreement to sell a commercial unit to the respondent, Ganesh Kulkarni, who later failed to pay maintenance, assessment and other charges amounting to Rs.29,36,552. The applicants invoked Clause 51 of the agreement to seek arbitration under …

AXIS FINANCE LIMITEDversusINSPIRA ENTERPRISE INDIA LIMITED

REJECTED

The applicant, Axis Finance Ltd., sought appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, alleging defaults by the respondent, Inspira Enterprise India Ltd., under a term‑loan agreement dated 22 Nov 2022. The dispute centred on whether Clause 14.5 of the …

HARPAL GIRDHARILAL CHETWANIversusThe State of Maharashtra

Disposed Off

The complainant, Harpal Girdharilal Chetwani, in a Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act case, sought restoration of a previously dismissed leave application and condonation of a 101‑day delay in filing it. The applicant also requested liberty to file an appeal under Section 372 of the CrPC, …

Uday Network TechnologiesversusCompuage Infocom Ltd

Disposed Off

The petitioners Arjun Vitthal and Uday Network Technologies filed a writ petition challenging an order of issuing process. Respondent No.1, Compuage Infocom Ltd., argued that an alternate remedy existed to contest the order. The petitioners, upon instruction, sought to withdraw the writ petition …

LAXMANLAL BANSILAL VYASversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

Allowed To be withdrawn

Petitioner Arjun Vitthal Kudhekar filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court seeking relief against the State of Maharashtra. The petitioner, through counsel, requested to withdraw the petition and was granted liberty to pursue alternative proceedings. The Court allowed the withdrawal and …

MEERUT NAGAR NIGAMversusBABURAM AND 3 OTHERS

The Meerut Nagar Nigam filed a petition under Article 227 challenging a civil appeal in which its application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act had been rejected, effectively dismissing the appeal. The petitioner’s counsel sought to withdraw the petition, requesting liberty to file a second …

RAJESH PALversusSIDAAN ENTERPRISES

DISPOSED OFF

The Applicants filed a Section 11 application seeking appointment of an arbitrator to resolve disputes arising from a Development Agreement dated 12 February 2016 and its subsequent addendums. The Respondents argued that arbitration had already been invoked in September 2022, so the three‑year …

RAMESH ALIDAS BAJAJversusASHOK KISHINCHAND CHAWLA

DISPOSED OFF

The Applicants filed a Section 11 application under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of an arbitrator to resolve a dispute arising from a 2004 Agreement to Transfer of a property. The Respondents argued that the substantive claim was time‑barred, invoking the Limitation …

DINESHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Dinesh filed a criminal revision under Section 126(2) of the Cr.P.C. challenging the Family Court's order dated 17.01.2025 that rejected his application for condonation of a 13‑day delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The trial court had earlier served notice, proceeded ex parte, and passed …

SHAHIDA PASCAL POSTELversusPASCAL MICHEL POSTEL AND ORS

Allowed To be withdrawn

The petitioner, Sonali Milind Patil, filed a criminal writ petition challenging an order dated 22 June 2026 passed by a Judicial Magistrate First Class. The respondents, Pascal Michel Postel and others, contended that the writ petition was not maintainable because an appeal under Section 29 of the …

MR. ATUL HIRALAL SHAH AND ORSversusM/S UNISPACE LANDMARK PVT LTD

Disposed Off

The appellants, purchasers of flats in a RERA‑regulated project, obtained a partial order from the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority directing the promoters to pay interest for delayed possession, contingent on the issuance of an occupancy certificate. The promoters failed to obtain the …

MR. ATUL HIRALAL SHAHversusM/S UNISPACE LANDMARK PRIVATE LIMITED

Disposed Off

The appellants, purchasers of flats in a RERA‑regulated project, obtained a partial order from the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority directing the promoters to pay interest for delayed possession, contingent on the issuance of an occupancy certificate. The promoters failed to obtain the …

FAIZ AHMAD KHANversusSMT. NUZHAT JAMEEL AND ANOTHER

Petitioner Faiz Ahmad Khan challenged a cost order of Rs 50,000 imposed by the Additional Principal Judge of the Family Court in a criminal matter, arguing that the amount was excessive and that he could not pay it. He sought modification of the order under the supervisory powers of Article 227 of …

VIJAY KUMAR GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Vijay Kumar Gupta filed a petition under Article 227 seeking to set aside the order dated 31‑08‑2026 of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Balia, which had allowed a revision under Section 5 of the Limitation Act despite the revision being time‑barred. The petitioner argued that the …

J P PORWAL REALTYversusMEGHNA DEVANG JUTHANI

Disposed Off

The appellant, J.P. Porwal Realty & Ors., filed an interim application seeking condonation of a 22‑day delay in filing a second appeal (Stamp) No. 22138 of 2025. The respondents, Meghna Devang Juthani & Ors., did not oppose the application. The court examined whether the delay could be condoned …

NARIMAN SAPAL PATEL AND ANRversusRARE TOWNSHIP PVT LTD

Disposed Off

The appellants, Nariman Sapal Patel & Anr., filed a second appeal challenging an order of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal dated 1 August 2025, which held that their earlier appeal was filed within the statutory limitation period. They argued that under Section 44(2) of the Real Estate …

NARIMAN SAPAL PATEL AND ANRversusRARE TOWNSHIP PVT LTD

Disposed Off

The appellants, Nariman Sapal Patel & Anr., filed a second appeal challenging an order of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal dated 1 August 2025, which held that their earlier appeal was filed within the statutory limitation period. They argued that under Section 44(2) of the Real Estate …

JAGPALversusUTTAR PRADESH SARKAR AND 2 OTHERS

The decree‑holder Jagpal filed a civil revision challenging the Additional District Judge’s order dismissing his 2009 execution petition for unpaid 12% interest on compensation awarded in a land‑acquisition case. The earlier execution petition filed in 1998 had been concluded in 2003 after the …

BIMAL KUMAR AWADH PRASAD SINGHversusM/S SYSTEMATIC INFOTECH PVT LTD AND ANR

Disposed Off

Petitioners Arjun Vitthal and Bimal Kumar Awadh Prasad Singh filed writ petitions challenging an order of issuance of process dated 23 March 2016. Respondent Systematic Infotech Pvt. Ltd. argued that the appropriate remedy was a revision petition, not a writ. The Court accepted this contention, …

BIMAL KUMAR AWADH PRASAD SINGHversusM/S SYSTEMATIC INFOTECH PVT LTD AND ANR

Disposed Off

Petitioners Arjun Vitthal and Bimal Kumar Awadh Prasad Singh filed writ petitions challenging an order of issuance of process dated 23 March 2016. Respondent Systematic Infotech Pvt. Ltd. argued that the appropriate remedy was a revision petition, not a writ. The Court accepted this contention, …

RITESH V SHAH AND ORSversusARUN RAMCHANDRA SURVE AND ANR

Disposed Off

The Applicants filed a criminal application seeking to withdraw their earlier challenge to an order dated 16 March 2024 that authorized issuance of process under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Respondent argued that the proper remedy was a revision petition. The Court …

JYOTI STRUCTURES LTDversusAFRICA POWER COMPANY CC

Disposed Off

Jyoti Structures Ltd., the defendant in a commercial suit filed by Africa Power Company, filed its written statement on the 120th day after service of the writ of summons, seeking condonation of delay. The trial court rejected the condonation, holding that the service date could not be excluded in …

LALLU RAMversusSHIV KUMARI DEVI

Lallu Ram appealed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 challenging a Family Court order that set aside an ex‑parte divorce decree dated 17‑12‑1990. The decree had been obtained after the respondent, Shiv Kumari Devi, failed to appear despite service of summons deemed sufficient. The …

Usha Kiran Enterprises Pvt LtdversusV N Timber Traders

Disposed Off

The applicant, Usha Kiran Enterprises Pvt Ltd, was the complainant in a criminal case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, where the trial court dismissed the complaint, resulting in the acquittal of the respondent. The applicant sought leave to appeal under the proviso to …

LAXMI ESTATE CO-OP. HSG. SOC. LIMITEDversusWALLACE FLOUR MILLS COMPANY LIMITED

Disposed Off

The cooperative housing societies filed a suit seeking joint ownership and conveyance of recreation grounds and an internal access road, claiming rights under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963. The defendants, including Wallace Flour Mills Ltd. and two charitable trusts, moved to dismiss the …

LAXMI ESTATES CO-OP. HSG. SOC. LTD.versusLAXMI CHARITABLE TRUST AND ORS.

Disposed Off

The cooperative housing societies filed a suit seeking joint ownership and conveyance of recreation grounds and an internal access road, claiming rights under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963. The defendants, including Wallace Flour Mills Ltd. and two charitable trusts, moved to dismiss the …

SATYABHAMABAI NAMDEO TAKATEversusBABURAO SHIVRAM DERLE

Dismissed

The appellants, heirs of Radhabai, claimed ownership of land Survey No. 143 based on a 1934 will and subsequent mutation entries, asserting that a later sale to the respondents was illegal and that they had acquired title by adverse possession. The trial court dismissed the suit, finding the …

SATYABHAMABAI NAMDEO TAKATEversusBABURAO SHIVRAM DEDE AND OTHERS

Disposed Off

The appellants, heirs of Radhabai, claimed ownership of land Survey No. 143 based on a 1934 will and subsequent mutation entries, asserting that a later sale to the respondents was illegal and that they had acquired title by adverse possession. The trial court dismissed the suit, finding the …

DASHRATH GANPAT PATILversusBALARAM BABU SANTE AND ORS

Dismissed

The appellant, Swapnil Dashrath Ganpat Patil, appealed a lower court judgment that dismissed his 2004 suit seeking declaration that a 1972 conveyance deed was forged, cancellation of the deed, and an injunction restraining the respondents from dispossessing him. The lower courts held the suit barred …

ARUN NARAYAN PATIL AND ORS.versusJAYSHREE JAYWANT PATIL AND ORS.

Disposed Off

The petitioners, who are coparceners in a Hindu Undivided Family, sought to amend a 1991 partition suit to implead Bafna Charitable Trust and Atul Builders, claiming the land bearing Survey No.151A was joint family property and that the trust and builder had no title. The City Civil Court dismissed …

LUKE DANIEL MACHADOversusTHE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (APPEALS) AND 6 ORS.

DISMISSED

The petitioner, heir of the late Edward Machado, sought a review of the Bombay High Court's order dated 11 March 2015 that dismissed his writ petition challenging the deletion of his name from revenue records for 28.52 acres of land in Village Bapnala, claimed to be in his possession since 1944. The …

KAMAL KUMAR BAJORIAversusBIMAL KUMAR BAJORIA

DISPOSED OFF

The defendants moved to dismiss the plaint on the ground that the partition suit was time‑barred under the Limitation Act, arguing that the cause of action arose in 2009‑10 and the suit filed in 2016 exceeded the three‑year period. The plaintiffs contended that subsequent incidents from 2013 to 2015 …

Dr. Govindaraja Venkatesh IyengarversusA. R. Sampathkumar (Since Deceased)

DISPOSED OFF

The Bombay High Court heard a probate suit filed by Dr. Govindaraja Venkatesh Iyengar, executor of the 1998 will of Rajalakshmi Gopal Ayengar, seeking probate of a bungalow in Chembur. The will bequeathed the property to the plaintiff and directed that proceeds could be used for the A.R. …

SACHIN CHANDRAKANT SALUNKHE AND ORSversusADARSH DEEPAK MALIK

Allowed To be withdrawn

The petitioners, Sachin Chandrakant Salunkhe & Ors., filed a criminal writ petition on 24 December 2024 challenging an order. They later sought to withdraw the petition, stating that an alternate remedy was available to contest the impugned order. The Court considered the request and allowed the …

DR. DEEPAK NAMJOSHI AND ANRversusKHATOON DAWOOD KHAN AND ANR

Allowed To be withdrawn

The petitioners filed three writ petitions challenging the issuance of process in separate criminal complaints. They later sought to withdraw the petitions, arguing that an alternate remedy was available to contest the orders. The Court examined whether the petitions could be withdrawn and …

DR. DEEPAK NAMJOSHI AND ANRversusRUKSANA RAZIULLA KHAN AND ANR

Allowed To be withdrawn

The petitioners filed three writ petitions challenging orders of issuance of process in separate criminal complaints. The petitioners, through counsel, later sought to withdraw the writ petitions, stating that an alternate remedy was available to contest the orders. The Court considered whether the …

DR DEEPAK NAMJOSHI AND ANRversusSHAMIM ZABIULLA KHAN AND ANR

Allowed To be withdrawn

The petitioners filed three writ petitions challenging the issuance of process in separate criminal complaints. They later sought to withdraw the petitions, arguing that an alternate remedy was available to contest the orders. The Court examined whether the petitions could be withdrawn and …

RAFIQUE A RAUF KAUCHALIversusNATHU RAMJI MALUSARE AND ORS

Disposed Off

The petitioner sought to amend his plaint to include a claim for removal of an alleged encroachment and possession of land identified in Survey No.15-2B, which the trial court had rejected on the ground of delay and alleged limitation. The High Court examined whether the limitation bar under Article …

MAGEBA BRIDGE PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusM/S TRADE CENTRE

2026 INSC 839Appeal(s) allowed

Mageba Bridge Products Private Limited sued M/s Trade Centre for recovery of money based on several unpaid bills. The trial court dismissed the suit on the ground that the plaintiff was not a registered partnership firm, but the Calcutta High Court reversed that finding, accepting the memorandum of …

KAMARIBEN KARSHANBHAI KANGADversusSPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The petitioners sought condonation of a 2,740‑day delay in filing a first appeal against a land acquisition order, invoking Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Relying on an earlier order that had already condoned delay for a group of related matters, the court allowed the condonation subject to a cost …

RANIBEN WD/O BHURABHAI JALUversusSPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The petitioners sought condonation of a 2,740‑day delay in filing a first appeal under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, relying on a prior order that had already condoned delay in related matters. The court, noting the waiver of notice by the State and the earlier precedent, allowed the condonation …

MAHAVIRKUMAR HARAKHCHAND JAINversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The applicant filed a criminal miscellaneous application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of a 53‑day delay in filing an appeal/leave to appeal. The respondent No. 1 waived service of notice, while respondent No. 2 chose not to appear. The court examined the facts and …

Neebha KumariversusThe State of Bihar

DISPOSED

The petitioner, Neebha Kumari, applied for a P.D.S. shop licence and was initially recommended by the District Selection Committee, but her recommendation was later cancelled and the licence was granted to another applicant, Subhawati Kumari. She filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing …

Manish Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar

DISPOSED

Manish Kumar Singh applied for a Fair Price Shop (PDS) licence but the selection committee chose another candidate. He filed a writ petition seeking to set aside that order, be selected as per the merit list, and obtain an interim stay. The respondents argued that the Bihar Targeted Public …

GODREJ PROJECTS DEVELOPMENT LIMITEDversusR. K. RAMANI AND ANR

Disposed Off

The petition under Article 227 challenged the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission’s order affirming the District Commission’s condonation of a 1192‑day delay in filing a consumer complaint against Godrej Projects Development Ltd. The complainants had booked a flat, paid part consideration, …

Mamta DeviversusThe State of Bihar

DISPOSED

Mamta Devi filed a writ petition challenging the issuance of a permanent PDS license to another applicant by the District Level Selection Committee, alleging violation of natural justice and seeking quashing of the order, restraining further licenses, and compensation. The respondents argued that …

Vijay Kumar,versusThe State of Bihar

DISPOSED

Vijay Kumar filed a writ petition challenging the alleged arbitrary and discriminatory selection for allotment of Fair Price Shops (PDS dealership) in Beldaur, Khagaria, seeking quashing of the selection, allotment in his favour and a stay of the process. The respondents, representing the State of …

Kumari Soni RajversusThe State of Bihar

DISPOSED

The petitioner, Kumari Soni Raj, challenged the rejection of her candidature for a PDS dealer post by the selection committee, alleging the decision was based on flimsy grounds. She had earlier filed an appeal before the Divisional Commissioner, which was dismissed on the ground that no provision …

Baidhnath RamversusThe State of Bihar

DISPOSED

The petitioner, Baidhnath Ram, challenged the cancellation of his Public Distribution System shop licence issued by the Sub‑Divisional Officer on 18‑09‑2013, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the order. The respondents argued that the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, …

Nagina Khatoon,versusThe State of Bihar

DISPOSED

Nagina Khatoon filed a writ petition challenging Memo No‑522 dated 09‑03‑2019 that selected a private respondent to operate a PDS shop under the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, and also objected to the selection in a representation dated 02‑08‑2019. The respondents …

Ajit Kumar Suman,versusThe State of Bihar

DISPOSED

Ajit Kumar Suman filed a writ petition seeking an inquiry into the matriculation certificate of respondent No.8, alleging fraud and requesting that his name be placed at the top of a public distribution merit list. The court observed that the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) …

Binod KumarversusThe State of Bihar

DISPOSED

Petitioner Binod Kumar challenged the suspension of his PDS licence (No. 87/08) by the Sub‑Divisional Officer, which was affirmed by the District Collector in an appeal. He filed a writ petition seeking quash of the suspension order and direction to allocate his licence to a Fair Price Shop. …

KUSUM JAISWARversusSHAHEEN SERTORIO ZARIWALA AND ANR.

Disposed Off

Kusum Jaiswar filed a writ petition challenging an order issued by a magistrate, which the respondent argued was a process order only reviewable by a criminal revision under Section 438 of the BNSS 2023. The petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition and instead file a criminal revision, …

STATE OF GUJARATversusNATVARBHAI RAYSINGBHAI HARIJAN

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

The State of Gujarat filed a petition under Article 226 seeking to quash a Labour Court award that reinstated a workman, Natvarbhai Raysingbhai Harijan, and ordered back wages. The workman was employed as a daily‑wage Rojamdar‑Chowkidar from 1982 until his dismissal in 1989, and the dispute centered …

DAXESH CHANDRAKANT SHAHversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioner, Daxesh Chandrakant Shah, filed a criminal miscellaneous application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of a five‑day delay in filing an appeal. The State of Gujarat opposed the condonation. The court examined the facts and the averments made in the application. …

JINABHAI LIMABHAI KAPADIAversusHIRJIBHAI MAHIRAJBHAI HINGRAJIYA (SINCE DECEASED)

47-DISPOSAL IN ANY OTHER MODE FH

The appellants filed a first appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure challenging the trial court's dismissal of their suit for specific performance of a 1990 agreement to sale of land in Junagadh. The trial court found that the plaintiffs failed to prove the existence of a valid …

UNITED INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.versusJAYANTIBHAI JOITARAM PRAJAPATI

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The United India Insurance Company Ltd. filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 seeking condonation of a 135‑day delay in preferring a first appeal against a judgment and decree of a civil suit. The appeal was delayed beyond the prescribed period, and the respondents were …

Bhushan Prasad Gupta @ Bhushan Gupta and Anr.versusShrimati Aruna Devi Ors.

DISMISSED

The petitioners, sons of the deceased, sought restoration of a probate suit dismissed for default in 2002 and filed a condonation application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act after a delay of more than five years, citing the elder brother's prolonged heart illness. The trial court rejected the …

RAM PRATAP SINCE DECEASED AND 7 OTHERSversusSMT BHAGDEI AND 3 OTHERS

The appellant filed an appeal against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal order granting the insurer the right to recover, alleging misuse of an agricultural tractor for commercial purposes. The Tribunal found a breach of the insurance policy and the appeal was filed after a delay of 3,186 days. The …

HANUMAN SINGH AND OTHERSversusUDAI SHANKAR SINGH

DISMISSED

The petitioners sought a civil revision of the Sub‑Judge’s order rejecting their application under Order VII Rule 11(a) of the CPC, which aimed to dismiss the plaintiff’s title suit alleging irregularities in a 1983 family partition. The plaintiff claimed that lands entrusted to the petitioners were …

Prashidh Narain Kishore Singh,versusThe State of Bihar

ALLOWED

The petitioner challenged a district court order that had, under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, condoned a 22‑year delay by the State in filing an appeal against a 1991 title decree. The State claimed it only learned of the decree in 2013, citing the death of the Government Pleader as a …

HEIRS OF DECEASED RAMSHAKTI JIVANDASversusHEIRS OF DECEASED BHALABHAI DAHYABHAI

47-DISPOSAL IN ANY OTHER MODE FH

The heirs of the late Ramshakti Jivandas filed a suit seeking declaration of ownership and an injunction against the heirs of the late Bhalabhai Dahyabhai, alleging that a 2010 sale deed in favour of a third party was fraudulent and that they had been in possession of the land since 1984 under a …

KAMLESH SINGHversusPUSHPENDRA SINGH KAMA AND 17 OTHERS

The petition under Article 227 challenged an order allowing the engrossment of a 1984 final partition decree on non‑judicial stamp papers. The decree, drawn in a suit for partition of immovable property, allocated shares to the plaintiff and defendant No.1 and, through the Commissioner’s report, …

SMT. PRITI SAXENAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The Allahabad High Court heard a criminal revision filed by Smt. Priti Saxena seeking to quash a charge of bigamy under Section 494 IPC that was framed on 12‑12‑2025. The revision also included an application for condonation of delay, relying on Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The petitioner argued …

HABBAN SHAHversusSHERUDDIN

2026 INSC 451Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Habban Shah, had agreed to sell agricultural land to the respondent, Sheruddin, for a stipulated price, receiving an advance but requiring the balance payment before execution of the sale deed. The trial court decreed specific performance, directing the appellant to execute the deed …

Muzaffarpur ClubversusSmt. Usha Sinha

DISMISSED

The plaintiffs, heirs of Mahant Raghunath Das, sued the Muzaffarpur Club for eviction, arrears of rent and damages, alleging that the Club held the premises under a lease dated 17 July 1889 (Ext.10/A) and had defaulted on rent since 1956. The defendants contended that Ext.10/A created a permanent, …

MOHANBHAI PARSHOTTAMBHAI PIPALIYAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

36-MCA DISPOSED OF

The applicant filed a criminal revision seeking condonation of an 87‑day delay in filing a petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The delay was attributed to the accused’s financial constraints and reliance on free legal aid, which caused procedural lag. The respondent argued that the …

MINAXIBEN VARGILAL SHAHversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

36-MCA DISPOSED OF

The petitioner, Minaxiben Vargilal Shah, filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking condonation of a 45‑day delay in filing a revision under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. She alleged that her advanced age, restricted mobility and difficulty in obtaining legal assistance caused the …

KARAM SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 17 OTHERS

The petitioner, Karam Singh, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing Respondent No. 2 to decide a restoration application and related applications filed in 2016, which remain pending. The petition alleged that the case has been pending for several years without any decision. The Court …

SACHIN KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Sachin Kumar appealed to the Allahabad High Court by filing a criminal revision against the Family Court’s order rejecting his application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. His wife had obtained a maintenance decree under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. after the husband failed to appear, leading to …

TULSI RAMversusD.D.C. RAMPUR AND OTHERS

The petitioners filed applications to substitute the legal heirs of the deceased sole petitioner and to seek condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The court found the affidavit explaining the delay satisfactory and allowed the substitution, noting the petitioner as deceased and …

SAIYAD NIJAMUDDIN RASULBHAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

36-MCA DISPOSED OF

The applicant sought condonation of a five‑day delay in filing a revision application, explaining that the delay was due to arranging funds to engage counsel. The issue was whether such delay could be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 on the ground of sufficient cause. The Court …

LAKHABHAI ANADABHAI SAVSETAversusPRAKASH KUMAR KHER

36-MCA DISPOSED OF

The applicant filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking condonation of a 77‑day delay in filing a revision petition. The applicant asserted that a No‑Objection Certificate had been obtained from the bank and the full amount had been deposited, justifying the delay. The court referred to the …

GAJANAN GARMENTS THRO KAILASHBHAI BAJRANGLAL BAJAJversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

36-MCA DISPOSED OF

The petitioners Gajanan Garments Thro Kailashbhai Bajranglal Bajaj & Anr filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking condonation of an 89‑day delay in filing a revision under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. They asserted that financial crunch prevented them from obtaining legal …

GAJANAN GARMENTS THRO KAILASHBHAI BAJRANGLAL BAJAJversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

36-MCA DISPOSED OF

The petitioners, Gajanan Garments Thro Kailashbhai Bajranglal Bajaj & Anr, filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking condonation of an 89‑day delay in filing under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. They claimed financial hardship prevented timely legal assistance. The State of Gujarat …

THAKOR JAGDISHKUMAR KAPURJIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

36-MCA DISPOSED OF

The applicant filed a criminal revision application but delayed filing a condonation of delay petition by four days, citing financial hardship. The respondent argued the delay was not sufficiently explained. The court examined the principles under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and found the …

CHIRAG ASHVINBHAI THAKKARversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

36-MCA DISPOSED OF

The applicant filed a criminal revision application seeking condonation of a 30‑day delay in filing under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, alleging financial hardship that prevented timely legal assistance. The respondent argued that the delay was not sufficiently explained. The court referred …

VARSHABEN BHAVESHBHAI NANANIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

36-MCA DISPOSED OF

The applicant, who is incarcerated and facing financial hardship, filed a condonation of delay application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, 162 days after the prescribed period. The respondent State argued that the delay was not sufficiently explained. The Court examined the liberal …

SIVAPRASAD KANUKUNTLAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

36-MCA DISPOSED OF

The applicant filed a criminal revision application but delayed filing a condonation of delay petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 by 41 days. The applicant argued that he was unaware of the lower court's order, was residing in Telangana, and faced a pending sentence warrant, which …

SNEHALBA GIRIRAJSINH JADEJAversusGIRIRAJSINH NARENDRASINH JADEJA

36-MCA DISPOSED OF

Snehalba Girirajsin​h Jadeja and another filed a criminal revision application but delayed filing it by 131 days. They pleaded that they were financially strained, responsible for school‑going children, and could not afford legal counsel, which caused the delay. The State, represented by the …

BALVANTJI CHAMANJI THAKORversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

36-MCA DISPOSED OF

Balvantji Chamanji Thakor filed a criminal revision application but delayed filing a condonation of delay petition by 121 days, citing financial constraints. The State opposed, arguing the delay was not sufficiently explained. The Court examined the principles from Collector, Land Acquisition v. …

PRAJAPATI CHETANBHAI HARIBHAIversusALKHAJI @ ASHOKBHAI SHIVAJI THAKARDA

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The applicant filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking condonation of an 87‑day delay in filing a revision under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, alleging financial hardship. The respondent argued that the delay was not sufficiently explained. The Court referred to the Supreme …

MANSUKHBHAI KHIMABHAI VATUKIYAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The applicant filed a criminal revision application seeking condonation of a 190‑day delay in filing under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, alleging financial hardship that prevented timely legal assistance. The respondent argued that the delay was not sufficiently explained. The Court …

AJAYSINH RANJITSINH CHAUHANversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

Ajaysinh Ranjitsinh Chauhan, who is in jail, filed a criminal revision application but delayed filing the condonation of delay application by 32 days, citing lack of legal knowledge and inability to contact his lawyer. The State opposed the condonation, arguing the delay was not sufficiently …

PANKAJ PARSHURAM PAWARversusCHIRAGBHAI VASUDEV TELNAGE

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The applicant filed a criminal revision application seeking condonation of a 94‑day delay in filing under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, alleging financial hardship that prevented timely legal assistance. The respondent argued that the delay was not sufficiently explained. The Court referred …

VAIBHAVIBEN D/O. BAKUBHAI KADIYA W/O GAURAVBHAI KANJIBHAI DABHIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioners Vaibhaviben D/o Bakubhai Kadiya filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking condonation of a 37‑day delay in filing a revision application, citing financial hardship and responsibility for a school‑going minor. The Court examined the principle from Collector, Land Acquisition …

SUNILKUMAR HARIBHAI PRAJAPATIversusAASIFMIYA SHEKHUMIYA SHAIKH

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The applicant filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking condonation of a 548‑day delay in filing under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, alleging financial hardship that prevented timely legal assistance. The respondent argued that the delay was not sufficiently explained. The court …

VINTESJI GOVINDJI SAGARversusKIRTIBEN VINTESJI SAGAR

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The applicant filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking condonation of a 130‑day delay in filing under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Respondents 1 and 2 opposed, arguing the applicant had not complied with a family court order and possessed sufficient income, while the State …

PATEL SUDHAKAR RAMJIBHAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioner filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking condonation of a five‑day delay in filing a revision under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, alleging financial constraints prevented timely filing. The State opposed, contending the explanation was insufficient. The Court …

MAHESHBHAI KADVABHAI VASOYAversusKESHUBHAI BABUBHAI LEELA

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The applicant filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking condonation of a 14‑day delay in filing a revision under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, alleging financial constraints prevented timely filing. The respondent argued that the delay was not sufficiently explained. The court …

UTTAM DUTTAversusTHE CUSTODIAN AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

Uttam Datta applied to the Special Court for certification of 100 shares of Reliance Petrochemicals Ltd and for lifting the attachment on those shares. His earlier 2009 application had been dismissed in 2013 for want of prosecution. He filed a fresh application seeking recall of that dismissal …

STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.versusM/S B.B.M. ENTERPRISES

2026 INSC 358Appeal(s) allowed

The work under a contract was completed on 30 July 2000, but no final bill or measurement certificate was issued by the Engineer-in-Charge. The State of West Bengal filed a notice seeking arbitration on 2 June 2022, more than 21 years after completion, and the High Court ordered arbitration, holding …

MOUNT LITERA ZEE SCHOOL AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF UP AND ANOTHER

The partnership firm ASJ Developers filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 alleging that Mount Litera Zee School issued a cheque of Rs 2,50,000 that was stopped and returned un‑encashed. The complainant was required to serve a statutory notice within thirty days …

Sarita Kumari alias Jyoti KumariversusGovind Kumar

DISMISSED

The appellant, Sarita Kumari, filed an appeal against a decree of divorce passed ex‑parte on 14‑02‑2019, but learned of the decree only on 29‑05‑2019 and filed the appeal on 18‑07‑2019, exceeding the limitation period by over five months. She sought condonation of delay, arguing that she never …

TRUPTI NARESHBHAI CHAUDHARYversusGUJARAT PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

31-NOTICE DISCHARGED @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioner filed a Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a writ of mandamus to quash a Gujarat Public Service Commission notification and to be declared the successful candidate for a specific seat. The High Court examined the pleadings and the reply filed by …

JOHNSON D. GETLORversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioner, Johnson D. Getlor, filed a criminal revision application and sought condonation of an 836‑day delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, claiming financial hardship and being in judicial custody prevented timely filing. The State opposed, arguing the delay was not …

IMRANBHAI MUSABHAI AHEMADBHAI PATELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioner, Imranbhai Musabhai Ahemadbhai Patel, filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking condonation of a 142‑day delay in filing under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. He alleged that financial difficulties and his detention in judicial custody prevented him from obtaining …

AMIT CHANDRAKANT PATELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The applicant filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking condonation of a six‑day delay in filing under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, alleging that the parties were engaged in settlement negotiations under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The respondent argued …

PARESHBHAI HAMIRBHAI MAKWANAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioner, while in judicial custody and facing financial difficulties, filed a criminal revision application 126 days after the prescribed period, seeking condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The respondent argued that the delay was not adequately explained. The …

EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATIONversusSUDHABEN RAMANBHAI PATEL

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The Employees' State Insurance Corporation (ESI) appealed against an ESI Court order granting dependency benefits to the family of the deceased Ramanbhai Patel, who died of a cardiac arrest while on duty. The appellant argued that the death was due to a pre‑existing coronary disease and not an …

UNION OF INDIAversusTIRUPATI TEXCO PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. 132-D

The Union of India appealed to the Allahabad High Court under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 against a series of orders of the Commercial Court, Kanpur Nagar that dismissed its applications under Section 34 of the same Act because it failed to make the statutory pre‑deposit …

JITENDRA CHIMANLAL DESAIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Disposed Off

The petitioner filed a criminal writ petition challenging an order issuing process and sought relief, while the State argued that the order was revisable only by a criminal revision under Section 438 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner requested permission to withdraw the …

NIDHIBEN W/O TUSHARBHAI SOJITRA D/O PRAKASHBHAI SAKHIYAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The wife of the petitioner and her minor child filed a criminal revision application and sought condonation of a 146‑day delay in filing the application, citing mental and emotional trauma. The respondent State argued that the delay was not sufficiently explained. The court referred to the …

Kumar JaiversusThe Union of India

ALLOWED

The petitioner, a 40% disabled candidate with a diploma in cinematography, applied for a Cameraman Grade‑II post under a 2015 disability recruitment drive and was provisionally accepted pending verification of his diploma’s equivalence to a degree. The recruiting authority later rejected his …

ADJ UTILITY APPS PVT LTDversusUNION OF INDA AND ORS

Disposed Off

Adj Utility APPS Pvt. Ltd. filed a writ petition under Article 226 challenging the denial of adjustment of excess IGST paid inadvertently against ineligible input tax credit, alleging that the department’s reliance on the time‑limit under Section 37(3) of the CGST Act was ultra‑vires. The petitioner …

MOHAMMAD SHAMSHIR KHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The revisionist, Mohammad Shamshir Khan, challenged a family court order dated 20 October 2016 that awarded Rs 10,000 per month as maintenance, claiming it was ex parte and beyond his means. He also contested the family court’s dismissal of his application under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C. on 24 …

Dinesh SahniversusShiv Narayan Sahani

DISPOSED

In Title Suit No. 44 of 2015, the sole plaintiff Durga Sahani died on 06‑04‑2021. His legal heirs filed a petition on 01‑09‑2021 under Order I Rule 10 of the CPC seeking substitution of their names, but the trial court dismissed it, holding that the suit had abated on 07‑07‑2021 under Order XXII …

UNION OF INDIAversusM/S ATUL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY AND 3 OTHERS

The Union of India appealed to the Allahabad High Court under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking condonation of a 375‑day delay in filing an appeal against a Commercial Court judgment dismissing its Section 34 application. The appellant claimed it was unaware of the …

Kumari Sujata @ Sujata Kumari @ SujataversusThe State of Bihar

ALLOWED

The petitioners, Sujata Kumari, Ram Bilash Singh and Ashutosh Kumar, filed an interlocutory application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of a delay of one month and seventeen days in filing a restoration application for Criminal Miscellaneous No. 85813 of 2018, which had …

ABHESING RUMALBHAI PARGHIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioner, Abhesing Rumalbhai Parghi, filed a criminal miscellaneous application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of a 173‑day delay in filing a restoration application for a Special Criminal Application that had been dismissed multiple times for non‑prosecution. The …

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.versusAARTI VIDITBHAI SHARMA

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of a 12‑day delay in filing its first appeal. The Court heard counsel for both the applicant and the respondents. It observed that limitation rules are not meant to defeat substantive …

Anupma KumariversusGopal Kumar,

DISPOSED

Anupma Kumari appealed against her husband Gopal Kumar challenging a decree of divorce. The appellant sought to implead the respondent's father as a second respondent, arguing the husband was of unsound mind and should be represented by a guardian. The court held that under Section 13(1) of the …

LIBERTY GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITEDversusBHARATBHAI MANJIBHAI JAMBUKIYA

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The plaintiff, Liberty General Insurance Company Ltd., filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of a 17‑day delay in filing its first appeal. Respondents 1 and 2 did not appear, while Respondent 3‑6 were represented. The court examined the reasons for delay, …

GITABEN WD/O. GAJENDRABHAI MANIYABHAI CHAUDHARIversusDILIPBHAI SUKABHAI PATEL

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The applicants filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of a 147‑day delay in filing their First Appeal. The court noted that the respondents, except for one, did not appear, and heard the applicant’s counsel. It observed that limitation rules should not defeat …

M/S New Kohli Sports,versusThe State of Bihar through Director,

DISMISSED

The petitioner, M/s New Kohli Sports, supplied sports goods for the Eklavya Mini Olympics in 2015 based on an oral direction from the State’s Director of Student and Youth Welfare, but was not paid. The petitioner invoked the Bihar Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal (BPWCDAT) under …

Amina KhatoonversusMd. Rasid Ansari

WITHDRAWN

The petitioners filed a Civil Revision (No.44 of 2022) before the Patna High Court seeking relief against the respondents. They later approached the Court requesting permission to withdraw the revision and instead file an appeal before the concerned District Judge within thirty days. The Court, …

Mahendra SinghversusThe State Of Bihar

DISMISSED

Mahendra Singh filed an application on 3 December 2025 seeking restoration of Criminal Revision No. 284 of 2024, which had been dismissed for default on 22 April 2025. The court noted that the application was filed well after the period prescribed by the Limitation Act and that no application under …

BRAJENDRA BABUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The Family Court had awarded maintenance of Rs.7,000 to the wife and Rs.3,000 to her minor son. The husband filed a revision challenging that order, but the revision was filed 415 days after the impugned order, exceeding the limitation period. The husband alleged physical and mental cruelty, …

The Bihar State Housing Board,versusM/s Enarch Consultants Private Limited,

DISMISSED

The Bihar State Housing Board (BSHB) entered into a 2011 agreement with Enarch Consultants for infrastructure development. An arbitrator awarded Rs 1.74 crore plus interest on 18 July 2021, but BSHB failed to pay and did not file a Section 34 application within the statutory period. The Board filed …