Supreme Court Restores Appeal for Condonation of Delay in Filing. Delay of 63 Days in Filing Appeal Condoned as Sufficient Cause Established Under Section 5 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved an appeal by the State of Jharkhand against a judgment and order of the High Court of Jharkhand, which had dismissed an application for condonation of delay in filing an appeal. The delay in question was 63 days, and the High Court had ruled that the appeal was barred by limitation. The Supreme Court, upon hearing the parties, examined the application for condonation of delay and concluded that sufficient cause was shown for the delay. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the application for condonation of delay, restored the appeal to its original number, and set aside the impugned order of the High Court. The court directed the High Court to decide the appeal on its merits within three months, clarifying that it had not considered the merits of the appeal itself. The decision was made without any order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Condonation of Delay - Sufficient Cause - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 5 - The court found that the statements made in the application for condonation of delay constituted sufficient cause for allowing the delay in filing the appeal. The appeal was restored to its original number, and the High Court was requested to decide the appeal on merits within three months. Held that the delay was justifiably condoned (Paras 2-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the delay of 63 days in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court allowed the application for condonation of delay, restored the appeal to its original number, and set aside the impugned order of the High Court, directing it to decide the appeal on merits within three months.

Law Points

  • Condonation of delay
  • Limitation period
  • Appeal restoration
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2008 LawText (SC) (03) 168

Civil Appeal No. 1981 of 2008

2008-03-10

Tarun Chatterjee, Harjit Singh Bedi

State of Jharkhand & Ors

Maya Singh & Ors

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against dismissal of application for condonation of delay.

Remedy Sought

Restoration of appeal by the State of Jharkhand.

Filing Reason

Delay of 63 days in filing the appeal.

Previous Decisions

High Court dismissed the application for condonation of delay and the appeal as barred by limitation.

Issues

Whether the delay of 63 days in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that sufficient cause was shown for the delay. The respondent contended that the appeal was barred by limitation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that sufficient cause was established for condoning the delay in filing the appeal under Section 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Judgment Excerpts

The statements made in the said application for condonation of delay of 63 days do constitute sufficient cause for condoning the delay in filing the appeal. Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay is allowed and the appeal is restored to its original number.

Procedural History

The appeal was filed against the High Court's order dated 30th August 2006, which dismissed the application for condonation of delay and the appeal as barred by limitation.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Section 5
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Allows Name Change in Birth Certificate Despite No Specific Provision Under Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969. Registrar directed to consider application afresh as inherent power to correct names exists.
Related Judgement
Tribunals NCLAT Dismisses Appeal as Time-Barred in Insolvency Matter Due to 244-Day Delay Without Sufficient Cause. Condonation of Delay Refused as Appellant Failed to Provide Adequate Explanation for the Delay in Filing Appeal Under Section 61 of Insolvency a...