OMPAL ALIAS OM SAINI vs State of U.P. — 67/2026

Case under Limitation Act Section 5. Disposed: Uncontested--LOKADALAT on 09th May 2026.

CRIMINAL APPEAL

CNR: UPSP010006052026

Case disposed

Filing Number

539/2026

Filing Date

19-01-2026

Registration No

67/2026

Registration Date

19-01-2026

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

1-District Judge

Decision Date

09th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--LOKADALAT

Acts & Sections

Limitation Act Section 5

Petitioner(s)

OMPAL ALIAS OM SAINI

Adv. MR JITENDRA MOHAN SAINI

Respondent(s)

State of U.P.

KIRAN

SHIV

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Judge

09-05-2026

Disposed

07-05-2026

hearing

20-04-2026

hearing

02-04-2026

hearing

12-03-2026

hearing

Final Orders / Judgements

09-05-2026
Copy of Order

Summary of Case 67/2026 The National Lok Adalat (Civil Court at Sahaspur, Saharanpur) accepted a petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone a 54-day delay in filing an appeal. Appellant Ompal (Om Saini) sought condonation, citing delayed receipt of certified copies from the lower court and subsequent court closures that caused approximately two months of delay. The District Government Advocate opposed the petition but ultimately consented to its acceptance on merits. The court granted condonation, applying established principles that practical justice should prevail over technical strictness when examining delay under Section 5. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 67/2026 The National Lok Adalat (Civil Court at Sahaspur, Saharanpur) accepted a petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone a 54-day delay in filing an appeal. Appellant Ompal (Om Saini) sought condonation, citing delayed receipt of certified copies from the lower court and subsequent court closures that caused approximately two months of delay. The District Government Advocate opposed the petition but ultimately consented to its acceptance on merits. The court granted condonation, applying established principles that practical justice should prevail over technical strictness when examining delay under Section 5. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District and Session Judge All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case