Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2022 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (2) TMI 1265 - HC - Indian LawsCondonation of delay of 132 days caused in preferring the regular civil appeal - sufficient cause shown for delay or not - HELD THAT:- It is trite that in a delay application, sufficient cause is the paramount consideration and if sufficient cause is shown, the Court should generally condone the delay. However, if the sufficient cause is imbibed with the laxity on the part of the delayer despite due knowledge, then Court should restrain itself from encouraging such practice and condone the delay. The application for condonation of delay was not objected by the respondents herein and no reply/ written objections appear to have been filed against the delay condonation application. It is pertinent to note here that notice of this writ petition is also served upon the respondents and here also, the respondents have chosen not the appear before this Court - sufficient cause appears to have been shown by the petitioner for delay. As per the catena of decisions of the Apex Court, “sufficient cause” in Section 5 of the Limitation Act must receive a liberal construction so as to advance the substantial justice and generally, delay in preferring the appeals are required to be condoned in the interest of justice - Thus, the consideration which cannot be ignored is that if sufficient cause for excusing delay is shown, discretion is given to the Court to condone delay and admit the appeal. This discretion has been deliberately conferred on the Court in order that judicial power and discretion in that behalf should be exercised to advance substantial justice. Another ground on which the learned first appellate Judge has rejected the application for condonation of delay is nonjoinder of necessary parties viz. original plaintiff Nos. 6 and 7, who happen to be the father and mother of original plaintiff namely deceased Sanjaybhai Popatbhai Mer - when the respondents have chosen not to resist the said application, with a view to fend off multiplicity of proceedings, such a curable technicality ought to have been avoided. Petition allowed.
|