The Division Bench of Supreme Court consisting of Justices M.R. Shah and B. V. Nagarathna opined that since no explanation much less a sufficient or a satisfactory explanation had been offered by respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein – appellants before the High Court for condonation of huge delay of 1011 days in preferring the Second Appeal, the High Court has erred in condoning the same.
Facts and Procedural History
The appellant herein – original plaintiff filed a civil suit for permanent injunction against the respondents herein – original defendants. The Trial Court dismissed the said suit. The First Appellate Court allowed the suit by quashing and setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court. After a period of approximately 1011 days, the respondents herein preferred the Second Appeal before the High Court. Application to condone the delay was also filed. By the impugned order, the High Court condoned the delay of 1011 days in preferring the Second Appeal, which is the subject matter of appeal before this Court.
Contentions made
Appellant: It was submitted that the High Court committed a grave error in condoning huge delay of 1011 days in preferring the appeal. Reliance was placed upon the decisions of this Court in the cases of Ramlal, Motilal and Chhotelal vs Rewa Coalfields Ltd., Ramachandran vs State of Kerala & Anr., as well as Pundlik Jalam Patil vs Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project, and Basawaraj and Anr. vs Special Land Acquisition Officer. It was prayed to allow the present appeal.
Respondent: They supported the impugned order by submitting that when the High Court has exercised discretion and condoned the delay, the same may not be interfered with by this Court in exercise of powers under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.
Observations of the Court
The Bench observed that:
“The High Court has not observed that any sufficient cause explaining the huge delay of 1011 days has been made out. From the averments in the application for condonation of delay, we are of the opinion that it was a case of a gross negligence and/or want of due diligence on the part of the respondents herein – appellants before the High Court in filing such a belated appeal. The period of delay from 15.03.2017 till the Second Appeal was filed in the year 2021 has not at all been explained.”
Applying the law laid down by this Court in the aforesaid decisions, it was observed that:
“The High Court has not exercised the discretion judiciously. The reasoning given by the High Court while condoning huge delay of 1011 days is not germane. Therefore, the High Court has erred in condoning the huge delay of 1011 days in preferring the appeal by respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein – original defendants. Impugned order passed by the High Court is unsustainable both, on law as well as on facts.”
Judgment
The impugned order passed by the High Court condoning the delay was quashed and set aside. Consequently, Second Appeal preferred by respondent Nos.1 and 2 stood dismissed on the ground of delay.
Case Name: Majji Sannemma @ Sanyasirao vs Reddy Sridevi & Ors.
Citation: Civil Appeal No.7696 of 2021
Bench: Justice M.R. Shah, Justice B. V. Nagarathna
Decided on: 16th December 2021
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
