J. RAMANAND Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order dated 05.01.2021 passed in I.A.No.61 of 2020 in O.P.No.21 of 2007 on the file of the Cooperative Tribunal, Hyderabad, whereby the Tribunal dismissed the I.A. filed by the petitioner to condone delay of 321 days in filing an application to set aside the docket order dated 03.5.2019 in the O.P, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition.

(2.) The facts germane for consideration in this Writ Petition, in nutshell, are as follows:

(3.) The petitioner is an allottee and member of the 4th respondent Society and that since the allotment and membership of the petitioner were at stake, he filed the O.P.No.21 of 2007 before the Tribunal seeking certain reliefs. During the course of proceedings, on 27.8.2010 the petitioner filed his chief affidavit. The case of the petitioner was that as there was no regular presiding officer for the Tribunal for a very long time, the matter were being adjourned from time to time and as such there was no representation on his behalf on 03.5.2019 as the junior for his counsel failed to note down the date of adjournment. Moreover, as against an order of dismissal passed I.A.No.387 of 2007, which was filed by the 4th respondent herein, the 4th respondent preferred W.P.No.6841 of 2008 before the High Court and that the 4th respondent used to take adjournments on the pretext of pendency of the said Writ Petition. In that process the O.P. was dismissed for default on 03.5.2019. There was no negligence on his part but for the reasons stated above. On coming to know that the O.P. was dismissed for default, he filed the I.A.No.61 of 2020 seeking to condone delay of 321 days in filing an application under Order 9 Rule 9 CPC to set aside the docket order dated 03.5.2019. He further stated that the Tribunal held that the delay is inordinate and beyond 10 years. The same is factually incorrect and liable to be set aside.