Jheky] lnL;-&fuxjkuh la[;k 99@2002 ^^eq- jkeI;kjh cuke txnhk** esa ,dyihB }kjk ikfjr fu.kZ; fnukad 13-8-2002 ds fo:) jktLFkku dkrdkjh vf/kfu;e] 1955 ¼ftls rRipkr~ la{ksi esa ^vf/kfu;e 1955* dgk tkosxk½ dh /kkjk 299 ds vUrxZr izkFkhZ txnhk }kjk izuxr utjlkuh izkFkZuk i= fnukad 23-4-2004 dks isk fd;k x;k gSA utjlkuh izkFkZuk i= ds lkFk izkFkhZ us ifjlhek vf/kfu;e] 1963 dh /kkjk 5 dk izkFkZuk i= Hkh izLrqr fd;kA 2- izdj.k ds la{ksi esa rF; bl izdkj gS fd izkFkhZ@oknh txnhk }kjk mi[k.M vf/kdkjh] uksgj ds U;k;ky; esa izLrqr okn fnukad 29-8-2000 dks vne gktjh o vne iSjoh esa [kkfjt dj fn;k x;k ftlds fo:) izkFkhZ us vknsk 9 fu;e 9 lifBr /kkjk 151 lh-ih-lh- ds vUrxZr izkFkZuk i= izLrqr dj okn dks jsLVksj djus dk fuosnu fd;kA bl izkFkZuk i= dks mi[k.M vf/kdkjh us vius vknsk fnukad 29-6-2002 }kjk Lohdkj fd;k ftlds fo:) fuxjkuh la- 99@2002 vizkFkhZ eq- jkeI;kjh o vU; 6 }kjk izLrqr dh xbZ] tks fu.kZ; fnukad 13-8-2004 }kjk Lohdkj dj yh xbZA jktLo e.My dk;kZy; dh fjiksVZ ds vuqlkj utjlkuh izkFkZuk i= ifjlhek vof/k ds ckgj izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA izkFkhZ us foyEc dks {kE; fd, tkus ds fy, vkosnu i= izLrqr fd;k vkSj mlds leFkZu esa kiFk i= Hkh izLrqr fd;kA vizkFkhZ jkeI;kjh o vU; 6 dh vksj ls Jh czãkuUn vf/koäk us odkyrukek izLrqr fd;k] ijUrq os mifLFkr ugha gq,A 3- eSus izkFkhZ ds fo}ku vf/koäk dks utjlkuh dh xzkárk ds Lrj ij foLr`r :i ls lqukA 4- izkFkhZ ds fo}ku vf/koäk dk eq[; rdZ gS fd izkFkhZ vuqlwfpr tkfr dk vui<+ xjhc O;fä gSA fu.kZ; fnukad 13-8-2004 dh tkudkjh muds vf/koäk us fnukad 14-4-2005 ls iwoZ dHkh ugha nhA v/khuLFk U;k;ky; esa Hkh izkFkhZ ds vf/koäk us mlds lkFk /kks[kk fd;kA mlds vf/koäk }kjk izLrqr U;kf;d n`"Vkarksa vkj-vkj-Mh 1982 i`"B 125 o ,-vkbZ-vkj- 1981 ,l-lh- 1400] vkj-vkj-Mh- 1981 i`"B 127] vkj-vkj-Mh- 1982 i`"B 22] 2001 Mh-,u-ts- ¼1½ ,l-lh- 67] vkj-vkj-Mh- 1993 i`"B 574 ij ,dyihB ij ,dyihB us dksbz xkSj ugha fd;k o mUgsa utjvankt dj fu.kZ; ikfjr fd;kA vr% fe;kn dks {kek dj utjlkuh izkFkZuk i= Lohdkj fd;k tk,A vius mijksä dFku ds leFkzu esa mUgksaus 2000¼2½ vkj-,y-MCY;w 996 o 2005 vkj-ch-ts- 502 U;kf;d n`"VkUr dk gokyk fn;kA 5- ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us Tamilnadu Electricity Board and another vs. N. Raju Reddiar and another ,-vkbZ-vkj- 1997 ,l-lh- 1005 esa ;g vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS fd %& "When an appeal/special leave petition is dismissed, except, in rare cases where error of law or fact is apparent on the record no review can be filed; that too by the advocate on record who neither appeared nor was party in the main case it is salutary to note that Court spends valuable time in deciding a case. Review petition is not, and should not be, an attempt for hearing the matter again on merits. Unfortunately, it has become, in recent time, a practice to file such review petitions as a routine; that too, with change of counsel, without obtaining consent of the advocate on record at earlier stage. This is not conductive to healthy practice of the Bar which has the responsibility to maintain the salutrary practice of profession." ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us ,e- iwjupj.k ,.M ,unj cuke LVsV vkWQ rfeyukMq ,.M vnlZ ,-vkbZ-vkj- 1997 ,l-lh- 1285 esa ;g dgk gS fd %& "The Review Petition has been filed by Shri Prabir Chowdhary who was neither an arguing counel when the appeal was heard nor was he present at the time of arguments. It is unknown on what basis he has written the grounds in the Review Petition as if it is a rehearing of an appeal against our order. He did not confine to the scope of review. It would be not in the interest of the profession to permit such practice. That part, he has not obtained "No Objection Certificate" from the Advocate-on-Record in the appeal, in spite of the fact the Registry had informed him of the requirement for doing so. Filing of the "No Objection Certificate" would be the basis for him to come on record. Otherwise, the Advocate-on-Record is answerable to the Court. The failure to obtain the "No Objection Certificate" from the erstwhile counsel has disentitled him to file the Review Petition. Filing of the "No Objection Certificate" would be the basis for him to come on record. Otherwise, the Advocate-on-Record is answerable to the Court. The failure to obtain the "No Objection Certificate" from the erstwhile counsel has disentitled him to file the Review Petition. 6- e.My dh ,dyihB ds fu.kZ; fnukad 13-8-2004 dks ns[kus ls tkfgj gksrk gs fd mä fu.kZ; izkFkhZ ds vf/koäk jh ve`riky flag dh mifLFkfr esa ikfjr fd;k x;k gSA izuxr utjlkuh izkFkZuk i= Jh lh-ih- kekZ vf/koäk }kjk izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA izkFkZuk i= ds lkFk tks odkyrukek izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA mlds lkFk ^^uks vkWCtsDku** dk dksbZ bUnzkt ugha gSA utjlkuh izkFkZuk i= ds lkFk fo}ku vf/koäk Jh ve`riky flag dk kifk i= Hkh ugha gSA vr% ;g fufpr :i ls ugha dgk tk ldrk fd muds }kjk ,dyihB ds le{k vkj-vkj-Mh- 1982 i`"B 125 o ,-vkbZ-vkj- 1981 ,l-lh- 1400] vkj-vkj-Mh- 1981 i`"B 127] vkj-vkj-Mh- 1982 i`"B 22] 2001 Mh-,u-ts- ¼1½ ,l-lh- 67] vkj-vkj-Mh- 1993 i`"B 574 U;kf;d n`"VkUrksa dks izLrqr fd;k x;kA utjlkuh izkFkZuk i= ds lkFk izkFkhZ dk kiFki= gS ijUrq muds vuqlkj og ,d vui<+ O;fä gS rFkk rkjh[k isk dh fnu og mifLFkr ugha Fkk bl dkj.k fufpr~ :i ls ;g ugha dgk tk ldrk fd izkFkZuk i= esa of.kZr rF; U;kf;d n`"VkUrksa ds laca/k esa lR; gSA 7- tgk¡ rd ifjlhek vf/kfu;e] 1963 dh /kkjk 5 ds izkFkZuk esa of.kZr vk/kkjksa ij foyEc dks {kek djus dk izu gS] izkFkhZ us fu.kZ; fnukad 13-8-2004 ds fo:) utjlkuh izkFkZuk i= jktLo e.My jktLFkku] vtesj esa fnukad 23-4-2005 dks isk dks isk fd;kA ;g ekuus ds fy, vfHkys[k ij i;kZIr dkj.k ugha gS fd jktLo e.My ds vf/koäk us izkFkhZ dks mijksä fu.kZ; fnukad 13-8-2004 dh lwpuk ugha nh o u gh izkFkhZ }kjk jktLo e.My esa muds }kjk fu;qä vf/koäk dk vFkok mlds eq¡kh dk kiFk i= isk fd;k x;k gSA izkFkhZ us vius kiFk i= esa bl izdkj dk dksbZ mYys[k ugha fd;k gS fd fdl jkst muds vf/koäk us izkFkhZ dks dgk fd mls gj iskh ij U;k;ky; esa vkus dh vko;drk ugha gSA tc mls U;k;ky; ds le{k mifLFkr gksus dh vko;drk gksxh rc mls lwfpr dj cqyk fy;k tkosxk rFkk og fuxjkuh isk dj fufpr gks x;kA Jherh eerknsoh cuek mn; flag 2001¼1½ MCY;w-,y-,u- 720 esa ekuuh; jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky; js ,slh nyhy dks ugha ekuk gSA ;g lgh gS fd ifjlhek vf/kfu;e ds fl)kUr mnkj rjhds ls dke esa fy;s tkus pkfg;s ijUrq bldk eryc ;g ugha gksrk fd dksbZ i{kdkj vius vf/kdkjksa ij lksrk jgs] eqdíesa dks rQjhgu yM+s vkSj nwljs O;fä ds gd esa iSnk gq;s vf/kdkjksa dks guu djus dk ekSdk flQZ bl vk/kkj ij fn;k tk, fd mls fu.kZ; dk Kku ugha FkkA lkE;k ¼equity½ dks nksuksa i{kdkjksa ds chp r; djuk t:jh gksrk gSA nkeks/kju fiYykbZ cuke lkmFk bf.M;k cSad fy- ,-vkbZ-vkj- 2005 ,l-lh- 3460 esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us ;g dgk gS fd%& "As the applicant is represented in the proceedings through his Advocate his knowledge of the order is presumed." ekuuh; jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky; us lqesj flag cuke eSllZ iq"ik eksVZl o vU; vkj-,y-vkj- 2000¼2½ i`"B 258 esa ;g vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS%& "The law is well settled that the law helps vigilant and not the indolent. The law of limitation is thus founded on public policy to see that there should be redressal of legal injury suffered by a party but also to see that every legal remedy must be kept alive for a legislatively fixed period of time. Though the condonation of delay is a matter of discretion of the Court but Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not say that such discretion can be stretched too far so as to condone any length of time. There has to be rationale criterion as regards exception to the explanation seeking condonation of delay. In some cases, the delay of shortest range may be in condensable due to a want of acceptable explanation whereas in certain other cases, delay of a very long range can be condoned provided the explanation thereof is satisfactory. The words "sufficient cause" under Section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice, but it does not mean to infer that the delay should condoned in each and every case unless discretion exercised by the Court is on untenable grounds or is arbitrary or perverse and in that eventuality, it would be a different matter. While condoning the delay in such cases, the Apex Court has further taken the view that the Court should not forget valuable rights which have accrued to the opposite party altogether. It must be borne in mind that he too is a looser if the delay is condoned whereas he would have incurred huge litigation expenses." nkeks/kju fiYybZ cuke lkmFk bf.M;u cSad fyfeVsM ,-vkbZ-vkj- 2005 ,-lh- 3460 esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us ifjlhek ds lEcU/k esa dgk gS%& "Hardship or injustice may be a relevant consideration in applying the principles of interpretation of statute, but cannot be a ground for extending the period of limitation." ih-ds- jkepUnzu cuke LVsV vkWQ dsjyk ,vkbZvkj 1998 ,llh i`"B 2276 esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS& "Law of limitation may harshly affect a particular party but it has to be applied with all its rigour when the statute so prescribe and the Courts have no power to extend the period of limitation on equitable grounds. The discretion exercised by the High Court was, thus, neither proper nor judicious. The order condoning the delay cannot be sustained. This appeal, therefore, succeeds and the impugned order is set aside. The discretion exercised by the High Court was, thus, neither proper nor judicious. The order condoning the delay cannot be sustained. This appeal, therefore, succeeds and the impugned order is set aside. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay filed in the High Court would stand rejected and the Miscellaneous First Appeal shall stand dismissed as barred by time. No costs." 8- iwoksZä fopkj foekZ ds ifj.kkeLo:i ifjlhek vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 5ds v/khu izLrqr izkFkZuk i= esa xq.koÙkk dh deh gS vkSj mls [kkfjt fd;k tkrk gSA vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 229 ds vUrxZr izLrqr dh xbZ utjlkuh ds le; ckf/kr ekudj [kkfjt fd;k tkrk gSA 9- mijksä foospu ds ifjizs{; esa vkosnu vkSj utjlkuh nksuksa fujLr fd, tkrs gSA fu.kZ; [kqys U;k;ky; esa lquk;k x;kA