TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 814X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he length, where the shortness of delay would be considered when using extraordinary discretion to condone the same. In BALWANT SINGH VERSUS JAGDISH SINGH [ 2010 (7) TMI 556 - SUPREME COURT] , this Court refused to condone the delay of 778 days in bringing on record the legal heirs of the petitioner therein through an application filed under Order XXII Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. It was observed that though sufficient cause should be construed in a liberal manner, the same could not be equated with doing injustice to the other party. For sufficient cause to receive liberal treatment, the same must fall within reasonable time and through proper conduct of the concerned party. The Court emphasised that for such an application for condonation to be seen in a positive light, the same should be bona fide, based on true and plausible explanations, and should reflect the normal conduct of a common prudent person. As the aforementioned judgments have shown, such an exercise of discretion does, at times, call for a liberal and justice-oriented approach by the Courts, where certain leeway could be provided to the State. The hidden forces that are at work in preventing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l before the High Court on 2 nd June 2010, numbered as LA. App. No. 655/2010. Since the appeal was time barred (delayed by 479 days), the first respondent applied for condonation of delay. 4. After considering the pleadings as well as the other materials on record, the High Court was satisfied that the first respondent, as the appellant, had shown sufficient cause for which it could not present the appeal within time; hence, vide the impugned order, it proceeded to allow C.M. No. 11018/2010. The delay of 479 days in presentation of the appeal was condoned but not without the High Court imposing costs of Rs. 10,000/- on the first respondent. 5. The explanation put forth by the first respondent, which ultimately found favour with the High Court, reveals the lamentable institutional inefficiency and the deplorable bureaucratic inertia. 6. The following events in the aftermath of the order of the Reference Court need to be briefly mentioned. Counsel who represented the first respondent before the Reference Court applied for the certified copy of the Reference Court s order on 22nd April 2009, despite the same being passed on 31st October 2008. Thereafter, certified copy was re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us occasions had refused to condone delays of lesser periods. An attempt was made to impress upon us that it was not even the case of the first respondent that the explanation proffered by it in the present matter was more cogent than the ones in the other cases before several fora which were not accepted. He urged that the High Court caused a failure of justice in not appreciating that inter-departmental correspondence, bereft of an attempt to explain the delay, did not amount to showing sufficient cause warranting condonation of the same. The approach of the High Court was criticised as mechanical and perverse. 8. Mr. Sharma submitted that the application for condonation of delay before the High Court simply provided a narration of the chain of matters post the order of the Reference Court. In the present case, not only was there a delay of almost 6 months in applying for a certified copy of the order of the Reference Court, but also a delay of 10 months thence in filing the appeal after receipt of approval from the Principal Secretary (Land and Building) on 11th August 2009. Such an explanation, Mr. Sharma urged, ought not to be construed as a satisfactorily explained delay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... THE PRECEDENTS 15. Learned senior counsel for both the parties invited our attention to various decisions of this Court, which we propose to consider hereafter. 16. In Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag Anr. v. Mst. Katiji Ors. (1987) 2 SCC 107 the relevant high court did not condone the delay of 4 (four) days in presentation of an appeal by the Collector in a land acquisition matter for which the order rejecting the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act was carried in appeal. This Court opined that legislature had conferred power under section 5 in order to enable the courts to do substantial justice to the parties by disposing of matters on merits . It was further held that the expression sufficient cause employed by the legislature is adequately elastic to enable the courts to apply the law in a meaningful manner which sub-serves the ends of justice that being the life-purpose for the existence of the institution of courts. Despite the liberal approach being adopted in such matters, which was termed justifiable, this Court lamented that the message had not percolated down to all the other courts in the hierarchy and, accordingly, emphasis was lai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... true and plausible explanations, and should reflect the normal conduct of a common prudent person. Further, the explained delay should be clearly understood in contradistinction to inordinate unexplained delay to warrant a condonation. 19. Lanka Venkateswarlu (Dead) v. State of Andhra Pradesh Ors. (2011) 4 SCC 363 happened to be a case where this Court set aside the impugned judgment condoning both a delay of 883 days in filing the petition to set aside the dismissal order by the relevant high court, along with a delay of 3703 days caused by the respondents in bringing on record the legal representative of the appellant. This Court observed that whilst the high court admonished the concerned government pleaders for their negligence in prosecuting the appeal before it and not providing a sufficient cause for delay, it nonetheless proceeded to condone the delay despite holding the same to be unjustifiable. 20. In Postmaster General Ors. v. Living Media India Limited Anr. (2012) 3 SCC 563 , this Court noted that in cases when there was no gross negligence, deliberate inaction, or lack of bona fides, a liberal concession ought to be adopted to render substantial justice bu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and laches not only in filing the appeal, but also the original writ petition before the high court at the first instance. While refusing to condone the appellant s delay, it was specifically noted that condonation of delay at that stage would be prejudicial to public interest as one of the respondents therein (Delhi Metro Rail Corporation) had received large amounts of money years ago to carry out development on the subject land in question. 24. We may profitably refer hereunder to some other decisions of this Court for the purpose of the present adjudication. 25. G. Ramegowda v. Spl. Land Acquisition Officer (1988) 2 SCC 142 , while summarising the position of law on sufficient cause , had the occasion to observe that the contours of the area of discretion of the courts in the matter of condonation of delays in filing appeals have been set out in a number of pronouncements of this Court. It was observed to be true that there is no general principle saving the party from all mistakes of its counsel. Noting that there is no reason why the opposite side should be exposed to a time-barred appeal if there was negligence, deliberate or gross inaction or lack of bona fides on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... personal machinery and the inherited bureaucratic methodology imbued with the note-making, file-pushing, and passing-on-the-buck ethos, delay on the part of the State is less difficult to understand though more difficult to approve, but the State represents collective cause of the community. It is axiomatic that decisions are taken by officers/agencies proverbially at slow pace and encumbered process of pushing the files from table to table and keeping it on table for considerable time causing delay intentional or otherwise is a routine. Considerable delay of procedural red-tape in the process of their making decision is a common feature. Therefore, certain amount of latitude is not impermissible. If the appeals brought by the State are lost for such default no person is individually affected but what in the ultimate analysis suffers, is public interest. The expression sufficient cause should, therefore, be considered with pragmatism in justice-oriented approach rather than the technical detection of sufficient cause for explaining every day s delay. The factors which are peculiar to and characteristic of the functioning of the governmental conditions would be cognizant to an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upon the sufficiency of the cause shown and the degree of acceptability of the explanation, the length of delay being immaterial. Sometimes, due to want of sufficient cause being shown or an acceptable explanation being proffered, delay of the shortest range may not be condoned whereas, in certain other cases, delay of long periods can be condoned if the explanation is satisfactory and acceptable. Of course, the courts must distinguish between an explanation and an excuse . An explanation is designed to give someone all of the facts and lay out the cause for something. It helps clarify the circumstances of a particular event and allows the person to point out that something that has happened is not his fault, if it is really not his fault. Care must however be taken to distinguish an explanation from an excuse . Although people tend to see explanation and excuse as the same thing and struggle to find out the difference between the two, there is a distinction which, though fine, is real. An excuse is often offered by a person to deny responsibility and consequences when under attack. It is sort of a defensive action. Calling something as just an excuse would imply t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e been referred to above. We find that the High Court in the present case assigned the following reasons in support of its order: a. The law of limitation was founded on public policy, and that some lapse on the part of a litigant, by itself, would not be sufficient to deny condonation of delay as the same could cause miscarriage of justice. b. The expression sufficient cause is elastic enough for courts to do substantial justice. Further, when substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against one another, the former would prevail. c. It is upon the courts to consider the sufficiency of cause shown for the delay, and the length of delay is not always decisive while exercising discretion in such matters if the delay is properly explained. Further, the merits of a claim were also to be considered when deciding such applications for condonation of delay. d. Further, a distinction should be drawn between inordinate unexplained delay and explained delay, where in the present case, the first respondent had sufficiently explained the delay on account of negligence on part of the government functionaries and the government counsel on record before th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Court felt that the delay in the appeal filed by the State, should not be condoned. 8. Regard should be had in similar such circumstances to the impersonal nature of the Government's functioning where individual officers may fail to act responsibly. This in turn, would result in injustice to the institutional interest of the State. If the appeal filed by the State are lost for individual default, those who are at fault, will not usually be individually affected . (underlining ours, for emphasis) 37. Having bestowed serious consideration to the rival contentions, we feel that the High Court s decision to condone the delay on account of the first respondent s inability to present the appeal within time, for the reasons assigned therein, does not suffer from any error warranting interference. As the aforementioned judgments have shown, such an exercise of discretion does, at times, call for a liberal and justice-oriented approach by the Courts, where certain leeway could be provided to the State. The hidden forces that are at work in preventing an appeal by the State being presented within the prescribed period of limitation so as not to allow a higher cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
