2016 (10) TMI 439

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... would submit that while passing Ext.P8 order, the 2nd respondent appellate authority did not exercise his discretion in a valid manner and that the petitioner had offered a valid reason for justifying the delay in approaching the appellate authority with the appeal, and the same ought to have been condoned by the appellate authority. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the Bar, I find that, in Ext.P8 order, there is no discussion, with reference to the relevant case law, as to why the justification offered by the petitioner for the delay could not be accepted. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o enable a consideration on merits rather than to throw out the matter, on technicalities. It would be instructive to refer to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Esha Bhattacharjee v. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy and others - [JT 2013 (12) SC 450], where, at paragraphs 15 and 16, the court culled out the broad principles that should govern an application for condonation of delay. They read as follows: 15. From the aforesaid authorities the principles that can broadly be culled out are: i) There should be a liberal, pragmatic, justice-oriented, non-pedantic approach while dealing with an application for condonation of delay, for the courts are not supposed to legalise injustice but are obliged to remove injustice. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... al principle is that the courts are required to weigh the scale of balance of justice in respect of both parties and the said principle cannot be given a total go by in the name of liberal approach. x) If the explanation offered is concocted or the grounds urged in the application are fanciful, the courts should be vigilant not to expose the other side unnecessarily to face such a litigation. xi) It is to be borne in mind that no one gets away with fraud, misrepresentation or interpolation by taking recourse to the technicalities of law of limitation. xii) The entire gamut of facts are to be carefully scrutinized and the approach should be based on the paradigm of judicial discretion which is founded on objective reasoning and not on .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X