Bhupendra Singh S/O Veer Singh vs STATE OF U.P. — 7/2026

Case under Limitation Act Section 5. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 11th March 2026.

Case disposed

Misc. Civil Appeal

CNR: UPLL010003972026

Filing Number

13/2026

Filing Date

20-Jan-2026

Registration No

7/2026

Registration Date

20-Jan-2026

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

1-District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

11-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 21-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Limitation Act Section 5

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Bhupendra Singh S/O Veer Singh

    Adv. Anand kumar Jain

  2. 2.Shayam Devi W/O Veer Singh

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF U.P.

  2. 2.Medical Officer Community Health Centre

  3. 3.Chief Medical Officer

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-Mar-2026

    orderView PDF

    Court Decision Summary The District Court of Lalitpur accepted the applicants' petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the 11-day delay in filing an appeal (Civil Suit No. 450/2022) against the trial court's order dated 09.12.2025. The court held that the delay was excusable as the applicants could not obtain certified copies of the order promptly due to administrative reasons, and found no deliberate negligence or mala fides. Applying Supreme Court precedent emphasizing substantial justice over technical considerations, the court permitted the appeal to proceed on merit rather than rejecting it on grounds of delay. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 11-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District and Sessions Judge

  4. 12-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    District and Sessions Judge

  5. 20-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 20-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 7/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The District Court of Lalitpur accepted the applicants' petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the 11-day delay in filing an appeal (Civil Suit No. 450/2022) against the trial court's order dated 09.12.2025. The court held that the delay was excusable as the applicants could not obtain certified copies of the order promptly due to administrative reasons, and found no deliberate negligence or mala fides. Applying Supreme Court precedent emphasizing substantial justice over technical considerations, the court permitted the appeal to proceed on merit rather than rejecting it on grounds of delay. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case