HANUMANNA M. Vs. CHAIRMAN AND DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY AND THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY CAUVERY GRAMEENA BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGING the legality and correctness of the order passed by the Learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 43908/2004 dt. 3.3.2008, this appeal was presented on 7.12.2011 with a delay of 3 years 9 months with full of office defects. There was a delay of 1374 days in filing the appeal.

(2.) INSPITE of granting sufficient time, Office objections were not complied with. Therefore, the matter was listed before the Registrar(Judicial) on 16.3.2012, on which date at the request of the Advocate for the appellant, a week's time was granted to do the needful. Inspite of granting a week's time on 16.3.2012, Office objections were not cured. In the circumstances, the matter was listed before the court again on 11.6.2012, on which date at the request of the appellant's counsel the matter was adjourned by 1 week and thereafter the matter was listed on 18.6.2012. On the request of the Learned Members of the Bar, a week's time was granted on 18.6.2012 to comply with the office objections. The order dt. 18.6.2012 further reads that if office objections are not cured within a week from that day, the appeal stands dismissed without further reference to the court. Inspite of the same, office objections were not cured. Since there was a peremptory order, the matter was listed before this court on 22.2.2013 to recall the order dt. 18.6.2012 dismissing the appeal for non -prosecution. Though there was no reason for us to recall the said order, still this court recalled the order of dismissal passed on 18.6.2012 on 22.2.2013.

(3.) WE do not see any reasons to grant any time because what is questioned in this appeal is the order of the Learned Single Judge dt. 3.3.2008 and we are in August 2013. For over a period of 5 years, if the objections are not cured, it is not a case where this court can still grant time. In the circumstances, the appeal is dismissed.