Supreme Court Condones Delay in Appeal Against High Court Order Due to Sufficient Grounds. Delay of 872 Days Condoned on Condition of Payment of Costs Under Civil Procedure.

  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved an appeal against an order dated 4th November, 2006, from the High Court of Karnataka, which dismissed an appeal solely on the grounds of delay. The appellant, Annappa @ Appanna, sought to condone a delay of 872 days in filing the appeal. The Supreme Court noted that despite service, the respondent did not appear to oppose the petition. After reviewing the application for condonation of delay, the court decided to condone the delay on the condition that the appellant deposits Rs.10,000 as costs within four weeks. The court clarified that if the costs were paid, the High Court's order would be set aside, and the appeal would be restored for a decision on merits within four months. The Supreme Court did not delve into the merits of the case, leaving that for the High Court to decide. The civil appeal was disposed of without any order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Condonation of Delay - Delay in Filing Appeal - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section Not mentioned - The Supreme Court considered the application for condonation of delay of 872 days in filing the appeal before the High Court and found sufficient grounds to condone the delay, subject to the condition of payment of costs. The court directed that if the costs were paid, the High Court's order would be set aside and the appeal restored for a decision on merits (Paras Not mentioned).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the High Court should be condoned.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court condoned the delay in filing the appeal subject to the condition that the appellant deposits Rs.10,000 as costs within four weeks. If the costs were paid, the High Court's order would be set aside, and the appeal would be restored for a decision on merits within four months.

Law Points

  • Condonation of delay
  • Appeal
  • High Court jurisdiction
  • Costs
  • Merits of the case
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2009 LawText (SC) (01) 44

Civil Appeal No.135 of 2009

2009-01-09

Tarun Chatterjee, H.L. Dattu

Annapppa @ Appanna

Special Land Acquisition Officer

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against dismissal of appeal by High Court on grounds of delay.

Remedy Sought

Condonation of delay in filing appeal.

Filing Reason

Delay of 872 days in filing the appeal.

Previous Decisions

High Court dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of delay.

Issues

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued for condonation of delay due to sufficient grounds. Respondent did not appear to oppose the petition.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that sufficient grounds existed to condone the delay in filing the appeal, emphasizing the importance of allowing parties to seek justice on merits.

Judgment Excerpts

The delay in filing the appeal before the High Court may be condoned subject to the condition that the appellant shall deposit or pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as cost in the High Court within a period of four weeks from this date. If the aforesaid amount is deposited, impugned order of the High Court shall stand set aside.

Procedural History

The appeal was filed against the High Court's order dismissing the appeal on grounds of delay.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Housing Society's Bye-Law Restricting Membership to Parsi Community — Validity of Bye-Law Affirmed.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Retired Railway Employee's Petition for Inclusion of Apprenticeship Period as Qualifying Service for Pension. Gap of 45 Days Between Completion of Apprenticeship and Regular Posting Breaks Continuity, Disentitling Claim fo...