Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Parighabai Laxman Turakane, aged 72 years, filed a second appeal before the Bombay High Court against the judgment and decree passed by the lower appellate court. Along with the appeal, she filed an application for condonation of delay, as there was a delay of about one year in filing the appeal. The appellant contended that she was suffering from jaundice and was hospitalized for a considerable period. She examined herself and the doctor who issued the medical certificate before the lower appellate court. The doctor advised her bed rest for about one year. The court considered the medical evidence and the age of the appellant. It held that the appellant has shown sufficient cause for the delay and allowed the application for condonation of delay. The court then admitted the second appeal and issued notice to the respondents. The judgment was delivered by Justice S.S. Shinde on 24 January 2012.
Headnote
A) Limitation Act - Condonation of Delay - Sufficient Cause - Medical Ground - The appellant, aged 72 years, suffered from jaundice and was hospitalized for a considerable period, advised bed rest for about one year. The court held that the appellant has shown sufficient cause for condonation of delay and allowed the application. (Para 2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant has shown sufficient cause for condonation of delay of 1 year in filing the second appeal.
Final Decision
Application for condonation of delay is allowed. Delay condoned. Second appeal admitted. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable in six weeks.
Law Points
- Condonation of delay
- Sufficient cause
- Liberal approach
- Medical ground
- Section 5 Limitation Act
Case Details
2012 LawText (BOM) (01) 11
Second Appeal No. 717 of 2011
Mr. A.G. Talhar for appellant, Mr. S.J. Gayke for respondent No.1
Parighabai Laxman Turakane
Ashabai Raosaheb Lasure and Babasaheb Laxman Turakane
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Second appeal against judgment and decree of lower appellate court with application for condonation of delay.
Remedy Sought
Condonation of delay of about one year in filing the second appeal.
Filing Reason
Appellant suffered from jaundice, was hospitalized, and advised bed rest for about one year, causing delay.
Previous Decisions
Lower appellate court had passed judgment and decree against the appellant.
Issues
Whether the appellant has shown sufficient cause for condonation of delay of 1 year in filing the second appeal.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant submitted that she was suffering from jaundice, hospitalized, and advised bed rest for about one year. She examined herself and the doctor before the lower appellate court.
Ratio Decidendi
Medical illness and old age constitute sufficient cause for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Judgment Excerpts
Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Learned Counsel for the appellant invited my attention to the contents of application which is filed for condonation of delay. He submits that the appellant/applicant was suffering from jaundice. To that effect the appellant/applicant examined herself before the Lower Appellate Court. The doctor who issued such certificate was also examined. The applicant was hospitalized and admitted for considerable period. She was advised for bed rest for about one year. The age of the applicant is 72 years. In the light of the aforesaid submissions, the application for condonation of delay is allowed.
Procedural History
The appellant filed a second appeal before the Bombay High Court along with an application for condonation of delay. The lower appellate court had passed a judgment and decree against the appellant. The appellant had examined herself and the doctor before the lower appellate court regarding her illness. The High Court heard the counsel and allowed the condonation of delay application, then admitted the second appeal.
Acts & Sections
- Limitation Act, 1963: Section 5
