TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1504X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s scanty regard to law. Had there been bona fide, the appellant would have pursued its right duly. But that has not come to record. No vigilant attitude of appellant is visible from record - if the appeal is thrown at the threshold, the appellant shall suffer. But the appellant having caused prejudice to other side, law of limitation shall not grant him any immunity today. We are also conscious that no one shall prefer to cause prejudice himself following the decision of the apex court in Collector Vs. Land Acquisition, Anantnag and other vs. Mst. Katiji and Others [1987 (2) TMI 61 - SUPREME Court]. But this is not the case where the appellant has acted bona fide. Therefore the stay application for condonation of delay does not deserve any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d was received by the appellant on 7.3.2012. Limitation expired on 6.6.2012. The affidavit filed today shows that accident of wife of an employee occurred on 9.9.2011 which was much before receipt of the impugned order and limitation began. That affidavit does not disclose how the employee was connected with this appeal and in what manner and what was his role, so that appellant was prevented to file the appeal duly. The affidavit also does not disclose whether the said employee has prevented the appellant to file the appeal duly by any means. 5. None of the owners of the appellant have come out with clean hands to state the facts fairly before the Tribunal. While the original application filed before the Tribunal on 23.7.2013 for condonat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of civil society to put an end to the litigation without the same being perpetuated without time limit. For no adherence to law of limitation, Right diminishes with the passage of time and remedy is thus barred thereafter. Unless a party exercising right of appeal is vigilant to limitation prescribed by law, it has no right to ask the other side to suffer for the indolence of the former. 8. Limitation has also prescribed life span to legal so as to save time of judicial forums without the precious time of courts wasted trying a time-barred remedy lost by afflux of time. Such remedy may lead to unending uncertainty and consequential anarchy. Law of limitation is thus founded on public policy which is enshrined in the maxim interest reipubl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mitation since a vigilant only deserves leniency while an indolent fails to deserve so. Just because the Tribunal believes that ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit filing an appeal late and refusal to condone delay may make the appellant remediless, an indolent has no right to abuse the process of law following the ratio laid down by apex court in the case of Collector vs. Land Acquisition, Anantnag and other vs. Mst. Katiji and Others - 1987 (28) ELT 185 (SC). No one has preemptory right of condonation of delay on flimsy plea. We are conscious that there cannot be presumption of deliberate delay on account of culpable negligence or mala fide. But reasons of delay explained must be acceptable to law. 11. The appellant has plead ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
