Case Note & Summary
The revision petitioner, Syed Mohammed Hussaini, an 80-year-old Muthawali and Sajjada Nasheen of Darga Hazrath Syed Shamsalam Hussaini, filed a Civil Revision Petition under Section 83(9) of the Waqf Act, 1995, challenging an order dated 17.08.2019 passed by the Presiding Officer, Karnataka Waqf Tribunal, Kalaburagi in Application No.20/2017. The petition was filed with a delay of 593 days. The petitioner filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (IA.I of 2023) seeking condonation of this delay. In his supporting affidavit, the petitioner stated that he is an octogenarian suffering from various ailments, which made it difficult for him to travel easily and frequently. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic during 2020-2022 required him to be more cautious due to his age, and he was advised not to travel. Medical records, including discharge summaries from SevenStar Hospital and New Era Hospital, were attached to the application. The respondents opposed the application. The court considered the submissions and held that the explanation provided by the petitioner constituted sufficient cause for the delay. The court noted that the petitioner is an old person and the delay was due to his ailments and the pandemic. The court condoned the delay in the interest of justice, subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000 to the respondents. The court directed that the revision petition be listed for admission on merits.
Headnote
A) Limitation Act - Condonation of Delay - Section 5 - Sufficient Cause - The revision petitioner, an octogenarian, sought condonation of 593 days delay in filing revision petition against order of Waqf Tribunal, citing old age, ailments, and COVID-19 pandemic - Court held that the explanation constitutes sufficient cause and delay was condoned in the interest of justice, as the petitioner had a prima facie case and the respondents could be compensated by costs (Paras 1-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the delay of 593 days in filing the revision petition under Section 83(9) of the Waqf Act, 1995 should be condoned on grounds of the petitioner's old age, ailments, and the COVID-19 pandemic.
Final Decision
The court allowed the application (IA.I of 2023) and condoned the delay of 593 days in filing the revision petition, subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000 to the respondents. The revision petition was directed to be listed for admission on merits.
Law Points
- Condonation of delay
- Section 5 of Limitation Act
- 1963
- Sufficient cause
- Liberal approach
- COVID-19 pandemic
- Old age
- Medical grounds
Case Details
2024 LawText (KAR) (03) 5
Civil Revision Petition No.200099 of 2023
Deshpande G.V., Ananth S. Jahagirdar, Ganesh S. Kalaburagi for petitioner; Liyaqat Fareed Ustad for R1; Syed Javeeda Haq for R3; Gopalkrishna B. Yadav, HCGP for R2
The Karnataka State Board of Waqf, The District Waqf Officer, Syed Ahraf Raza
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil revision petition under Section 83(9) of the Waqf Act, 1995 challenging order of Waqf Tribunal, with application for condonation of delay.
Remedy Sought
Condonation of 593 days delay in filing revision petition and setting aside the order dated 17.08.2019 passed by the Karnataka Waqf Tribunal, Kalaburagi in Application No.20/2017.
Filing Reason
Delay due to petitioner's old age, ailments, and COVID-19 pandemic.
Previous Decisions
Order dated 17.08.2019 passed by the Presiding Officer, Karnataka Waqf Tribunal, Kalaburagi in Application No.20/2017.
Issues
Whether the delay of 593 days in filing the revision petition should be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that he is an octogenarian suffering from various ailments, making travel difficult, and the COVID-19 pandemic further restricted his movement.
Respondents opposed the application.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the explanation of old age, ailments, and the COVID-19 pandemic constituted sufficient cause for the delay, and in the interest of justice, the delay should be condoned, especially since the petitioner had a prima facie case and the respondents could be compensated by costs.
Judgment Excerpts
The revision petitioner has filed application in IA.I of 2023 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking to condone delay of 593 days in filing this Revision Petition in assailing the order dated 17th August, 2019 passed in Application No.20 of 2017 by the learned Presiding Officer, Karnataka Waqf Tribunal, Kalaburagi.
The application is supported by the affidavit of Syed Mohammed Hussaini, in which he has stated that the Petitioner is an Octogenarian and is suffering from various ailments because of which he is not able to travel easily and frequently.
Further, it is stated that there was also COVID-19 pandemic during 2020-2022 and considering his age, he was required to be more cautious and was not advised to travel.
The medical records of the revision petitioner are also enclosed with the application.
Procedural History
The order dated 17.08.2019 was passed by the Karnataka Waqf Tribunal, Kalaburagi in Application No.20/2017. The revision petitioner filed Civil Revision Petition No.200099 of 2023 before the High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench, along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (IA.I of 2023) to condone the delay of 593 days. The court heard arguments and reserved judgment on IA.I of 2023, and pronounced the order on 27.03.2024.
Acts & Sections
- Limitation Act, 1963: Section 5
- Waqf Act, 1995: Section 83(9)
