WAPDA THROUGH CHAIRMAN versus KHAN COTTON GINNING FACTORY
Section 5 and Article 156 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), the delay of the limitation of the Section 100 Second Appeal is reason enough to cause negligence of the party in the present case, the Second Appeal, which was banned for one year and six days. Defendants were upheld by the Department. This delay was due to the late approval of the court fee for filing another appeal. The person justifying the delay should explain the satisfaction of the court to the delay of each day and also prove that the delay was due to him. The controlling person who was negligent in filing an appeal and failed to pursue his case with a proper case was not entitled to any wrongdoing by the court or consider the delayed delay under section 5. Any departing department should be treated like a normal case. The 90-day judgment set for filing the second appeal of the Limitation Act, 1908, had already expired before applying for copies of the judgment and decree. The current appeal was banned for one year and six days, with the defendants showing no good reason for the delay.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2014
