Case Note & Summary
The petition was filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking to quash an order dated 04.01.2022 passed by the learned 4th Senior Civil Judge, Vadodara, which rejected the petitioner's application for condonation of delay in restoring Regular Civil Suit No. 819 of 1997. The dispute involved ancestral residential property in Vadodara, which had been damaged during communal riots in 1990. The petitioner claimed inheritance of the property after the death of their grandfather in 1992. A civil suit was initiated in 1997, but the petitioner faced challenges in the proceedings, including the rejection of an interim application and the eventual dismissal of the suit for default in 2018 due to non-appearance. The petitioner became aware of the dismissal only in June 2021 and subsequently filed an application for restoration along with a request for condonation of delay, which was rejected by the court. The petitioner argued that the dismissal was unjust as they were not served notice properly. However, the court found that the petitioner had not provided a sufficient cause for the delay, emphasizing the responsibility of litigants to remain active in their cases. The court ultimately dismissed the petition, stating that the rejection of the application was consistent with legal principles and there was no merit in the petition.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Condonation of Delay - Sufficient Cause - Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 - The court held that the petitioner failed to provide sufficient cause for the delay of 1092 days in filing the application for restoration of the suit, leading to the rejection of the application. The court emphasized the need for a litigant to be vigilant and active in prosecuting their case, and found no merit in the petition. (Paras 6-7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner established sufficient cause for the delay in filing the application for restoration of the civil suit.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the petition, affirming the rejection of the application for condonation of delay, stating that no sufficient cause was established for the delay of 1092 days.
Law Points
- Articles 226
- 227 of the Constitution of India
- Order IX Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure
- 1908
- Section 5 of the Limitation Act
