TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 959X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng newer persons to seek legal remedy by approaching the courts. So a life span must be fixed for each remedy. Unending period for launching the remedy may lead to unending uncertainty and consequential anarchy. The statute providing limitation is founded on public policy. It is enshrined in the maxim Interest reipublicae up sit finis litium (it is for the general welfare that a period be put to litigation). It is for this reason that when an action becomes barred by time, the Court should be slow to ignore delay for the reason that once limitation expires, other party matures his rights on the subject with attainment of finality. Though it cannot be doubted that refusal to condone delay would result in foreclosing the suiter from putting f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner, Sector-2, Commercial Tax, Meerut received impugned order vide letter on 20.05.2013 sent by Tribunal Deputy Commissioner-cum-State Representative and the Deputy Commissioner has prepared required relevant document sent to Deputy Commissioner,-cum-State Representative, Commercial Tax, Meerut vide letter dated 11.12.2013, i.e., after more than six months. For this six months there is no explanation whatsoever. 3. It is true that when State is a party, and file revision with some delay, it may deserve some leverage for official hierarchical steps for permission etc. but a wholly unexplained, reckless and negligent approach of delay running in almost one and half years and more cannot be overlooked particularly when it is not the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and agents, and also, the intention of Government not to allow such officers of doubtful integrity to go scot free, the Court should also come forward to do justice in the interest of public at large, but, a mere eye wash kind of explanation, without any honest intention of State authorities to proceed against tainted officers, or, those who have acted in a bad faith, or, those who have worked negligently, the explanation that delay must be condoned in public interest would be superficial and lacking bona fide, hence difficult to be accepted by Court. 6. In G. Ramegowda, Major Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, Bangalore, AIR 1988 SC 897, in para 8 of the judgment, the Court said: "8. . . . . . . . Therefore, in assessing what, in a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wer to extend the period of limitation on equitable grounds." 8. The Rules of limitation are not meant to destroy rights of parties. They virtually take away the remedy. They are meant with the objective that parties should not resort to dilatory tactics and sleep over their rights. They must seek remedy promptly. The object of providing a legal remedy is to repair the damage caused by reason of legal injury. The statute relating to limitation determines a life span for such legal remedy for redress of the legal injury, one has suffered. Time is precious and the wasted time would never revisit. During efflux of time, newer causes would come up, necessitating newer persons to seek legal remedy by approaching the courts. So a life span must ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt of suiter, the approach of Court is also bound to change. Lapse on the part of litigant in approaching Court within time is understandable but a total inaction for long period of delay without any explanation whatsoever and that too in absence of showing any sincere attempt on the part of suiter, would add to his negligence, and would be relevant factor going against him. 10. I need not to burden this judgment with a catena of decisions explaining and laying down as to what should be the approach of Court on construing "sufficient cause" under Section 5 of Act, 1963 and it would be suffice to refer a very few of them besides those already referred. 11. In Shakuntala Devi Jain Vs. Kuntal Kumari, AIR 1969 SC 575 a three Judge Bench of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt should be reluctant to refuse condonation, will not help the petitioner in any manner keeping in view the kind of explanation rendered herein since I find that here is a case which shows a complete careless and reckless long delay on the part of applicant, which has remained virtually unexplained at all. Therefore, I do not find any reason to exercise my judicial discretion exercising judiciously so as to justify condonation of delay in the present case. 15. It is then contended that in revenue matters, cases involving substantial questions, be not made to suffer as that will be against public interest and therefore, the Court should be slow in non suiting the revision only on the ground of limitation. 16. Since it is contended that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
