Supreme Court Allows Appellant in Condonation of Delay Case Due to Sufficient Cause. Delay of 11 Days Found Justifiable, Leading to Restoration of Appeal Under Section 5 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

In Favour of Accused
  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved an appeal filed by Nilkanth Kawduji Shivankar against an order from the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, which had rejected an application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The delay in question was 11 days. The Supreme Court, upon hearing the arguments from both parties, found the reasons provided in the application for condonation of delay to be satisfactory and constituted sufficient cause. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order rejecting the application, allowed the application for condonation of delay, and restored the appeal to its original file. The court instructed the High Court to dispose of the appeal promptly, ideally within three months from the communication of this order, without unnecessary adjournments. The appeal was allowed with no order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Condonation of Delay - Sufficient Cause - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 5 - The court found sufficient cause for condoning the delay of 11 days in filing the appeal, thus allowing the application for condonation of delay and restoring the appeal to its original file. The High Court was directed to dispose of the appeal expeditiously, preferably within three months (Paras 1-2).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the delay of 11 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, set aside the High Court's order, and restored the appeal to its original file, directing the High Court to dispose of the appeal within three months.

Law Points

  • Condonation of delay
  • sufficient cause
  • restoration of appeal
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2008 LawText (SC) (02) 634

Civil Appeal No. 1354 of 2008 (@ SLP(C) No. 12823/2006)

2008-02-18

Tarun Chatterjee, Harjit Singh Bedi

Nilkanth Kawduji Shivankar

Shivshakti Sikshan Sanstha & Ors

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal for condonation of delay in filing an appeal.

Remedy Sought

Restoration of the appeal and condonation of delay.

Filing Reason

Delay of 11 days in filing the appeal.

Previous Decisions

High Court rejected the application for condonation of delay.

Issues

Whether the delay of 11 days in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that sufficient cause existed for the delay. The respondent's position was not detailed.

Ratio Decidendi

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

Judgment Excerpts

We are satisfied with the statements made in the application for condonation of delay which constitute sufficient cause for condoning the delay in filing the appeal. The High Court is now requested to dispose of the appeal at an early date, preferably within three months from the date of communication of this order.

Procedural History

The High Court rejected the application for condonation of delay on 23rd November 2005, leading to the appeal before the Supreme Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Section 5
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Purchasers in Property Dispute — No Allegations of Cheating Made Against Appellants in FIR. The court held that where the FIR contains no allegations against the purchasers and a civil suit is pend...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Conviction of Five Accused in Murder Case Under Sections 302, 148, and 149 IPC. Reliable Eyewitness Testimony Including Independent Medical Professional Sustained Conviction Despite Unexplained Delay in Police Examination of Wit...