Madras High Court
R.Balasubramaniam vs The General Manager on 12 March, 2026
Author: R. Suresh Kumar
Bench: R. Suresh Kumar
C.M.P.No.25601 of 2025 in
W.A.Sr.No.134074 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.03.2026
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SENTHILKUMAR
C.M.P.No.25601 of 2025 in W.A.Sr.No.134074 of 2025
R.Balasubramaniam .. Petitioner
Vs.
1. The General Manager
Canara Bank, Head Office
112, J.C.Road, Bangalore – 560 002.
2. The Deputy General Manager
Canara Bank, HRM Section
Central Office, Chennai – 600 018.
3. The Chief Manager
Canara Bank, Alangapuram Branch, Salem – 636 016.
4. R.Vimala
5. Remya P. Nair
6. Toms Verghese
7. Venkatesh Tamilurkar
8. Santhosh Thomas
9. Maram Srikanth .. Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, to
condone the delay of 2613 days in filing the writ appeal.
For the Petitioner : Ms.Vijayalakshmi Raju
For the Respondents : Mr.C.Seethapathy
for R1 to R3
Page 1 of 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2026 01:33:07 pm )
C.M.P.No.25601 of 2025 in
W.A.Sr.No.134074 of 2025
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.) Heard Ms.Vijayalakshmi Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.C.Seethapathy, learned counsel for respondents 1 to 3.
2. The delay is 2613 days in filing W.A.Sr.No.134074 of 2025.
The reasons for such delay has been stated in paragraphs 8, 9 and 10 of the affidavit, which reads thus:-
“8. From 2017 onwards, I suffered multiple health problems including an orthopedic injury, TURP surgery in 2021, eye surgery in 2022, and prolonged Ayurvedic Rehabilitation in 2024. These conditions restricted my capacity to pursue litigation diligently.
9. I also faced financial difficulties, including availing a pension loan to meet medical and household expenses, which further constrained my ability to engage counsel.
10. Due to lack of proper legal advice, I was unaware of my right to prefer a writ appeal against the closure of my writ petition. I was only upon engaging new counsel in 2024 that I was advised about this remedy, whereupon I acted promptly to file the present appeal.”
3. Having perused the said reasons given by the petitioner for condoning such huge delay of 2613 days, it has been mentioned that he underwent some surgeries in the year 2021 and 2022 and prolonged Ayurvedic rehabilitation in the year 2024 and also has Page 2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2026 01:33:07 pm ) C.M.P.No.25601 of 2025 in W.A.Sr.No.134074 of 2025 stated that, he was not aware of his right to prefer a writ appeal against the closure of his writ petition. It was only after engaging a new counsel in the year 2024, he came to know as per his advice that, he has got a remedy of filing the writ appeal.
4. These kind of ignorance of law, that the right accrued on the petitioner under law to prefer an appeal, cannot be an excuse, that too, for condoning the delay of 2613 days. As per various judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, these kind of reasons cannot be acceptable for condoning the delay, as by condoning such huge delay, since greater prejudice would be caused to the other side of the lis, that kind of indulgence cannot be shown.
5. In that view of the matter, we are not inclined to entertain this petition, accordingly, it is dismissed. As a result of which, the main writ appeal in W.A.Sr.No.134074 of 2025 stands rejected in the SR stage. No costs.
(R.S.K., J.) (N.S., J.)
12.03.2026
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order Neutral Citation:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Index:Yes/No Page 3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2026 01:33:07 pm ) C.M.P.No.25601 of 2025 in W.A.Sr.No.134074 of 2025 (drm) R. SURESH KUMAR, J.
AND N. SENTHILKUMAR, J.
(drm) C.M.P.No.25601 of 2025 in W.A.Sr.No.134074 of 2025 12.03.2026 Page 4 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2026 01:33:07 pm )