State Of Manipur And 2 Ors v. Irungbam Premita Devi
Court: High Court of Manipur
Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE,HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GOLMEI GAIPHULSHILLU KABUI
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Manipur judgment dated 2024-12-16. State Of Manipur And 2 Ors v. Irungbam Premita Devi. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
Digitally signed by Item No. 49 KHOIROM KHOIROM BIPINCHAND BIPINCHANDRA SINGH IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR Date: 2024. 12. 17 RA SINGH 15:00:12 +05'30' AT IMPHAL MC(WA) No. 16 of 2024 State of Manipur & 2 Ors. … Applicants - Versus - Irungbam Premita Devi … Respondent B E F O R E HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. D. KRISHNAKUMAR HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE GOLMEI GAIPHULSHILLU 16. 12. 2024 [D. Krishnakuamr, CJ] Heard Mr. Lenin Hijam, learned Advocate General assisted by Mr. Dimalkumar Haobam, learned counsel appearing for the applicants and Mr. M. Hemchandra, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent. The present application has been filed against the order of the Writ Court dated 13. 10. 2022 passed in W. P. (C) No. 798 of 2019. According to the learned Advocate General, the appeal has been filed praying for condonation of delay of 465 days in preferring the intra court writ appeal and also explained the reasons in the aforesaid condone delay application.
The delay was neither deliberate nor intentional but due to bonafide reasons. Further, the learned Advocate General submits that this Court has condoned a similar matter and the writ appeal came up for admission which has been entertained and still pending before this Court. Mr. M. Hemchandra, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent has not objected to the prayer for condonation of delay of 465 days, that it has been stated the reasons in para No. 3 of the affidavit. P a g e 1 | 2 There is no dispute between the parties that connected writ appeal has been pending before this Court being W. A. No. 7 of 2024 and the same has been listed on 13. 01. 2025. In such consensus, considering the aforesaid submissions made by the parties and the reasons explained at para No.
3 of the affidavit filed by the State appellant, we are of the view that in view of the fact that connected writ appeal is pending before this Court, we are inclined to condone the delay of 465 days in preferring the writ appeal on payment of cost of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only to the High Court Bar Association of Manipur. Both the parties agreed that the payment of cost can be made to the High Court Bar Association of Manipur for relief of the Internal Displaced Persons (IDP) within a period of 2 (two) weeks. If memo has been filed to that effect, Registry is directed to number the appeal and the same may be listed for admission immediately after vacation. The present application stands disposed of. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Bipin P a g e 2 | 2
Source: High Court of Manipur. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.