The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India recently discussed the condonation of inordinate delay in the absence of any reasonable explanation.
The Division Bench of HMJ Sudhanshu Dhulia and HMJ Prasanna B. Varale did not find the reasoning afforded by the appellant convincing enough for condoning a delay of 14 years.
Brief Facts
The matter pertains to a land dispute regarding sale of land from one person to another followed by another sale stating that the first sale could not be done since the person selling the same lacked any transferable right in the property. The appellant herein is the person in whose favour the second sale deed was executed.
The instant appeal assails Allahabad High Court order dismissing appellant’s petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India which invoked the High Court’s supervisory jurisdiction against order passed by the Additional District Judge.
Observations of the Court
The Court considered the question of “Should an inordinate delay, which has no reasonable explanation be condoned?”, in other words, whether application under Order IX, Rule 7 of the CPC could be allowed after a delay of almost 14 years, and if there was any sufficient cause for filing such a belated application.
The Court stated that,"The term ‘sufficient cause’ was not defined in the Limitation Act, it was settled through various cases that the term has to be construed liberally and in order to meet the ends of justice.”
The Court explained that it is aimed at protecting deserving and meritorious cases from being dismissed solely on the ground of delay.
The Court further pressed upon the Court’s discretionary power to be exercised judiciously and not in cases of gross negligence as decided in Majji Sannemma @ Sanyasirao Vs. Reddy Sridevi, 2021 Latest Caselaw 692 SC. It further hinted at the discretion not to be exercised in the absence of any reasonable explanation for the delay as provided in P.K. Ramachandran Vs. State of Kerala & Anr, 1997 Latest Caselaw 662 SC.
The Apex Court perused the application dated 23.11.2020 wherein the appellant sought benefit of Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 for condoning delay of almost 14 years. The Court did not find any satisfactory or reasonable ground for explaining such delay.
The Court found the appellant being grossly negligent in pursuing the matter before the Court and found all the Courts concerned to be correct in dismissing the appellant’s belated claim.
Decision of the Court
Therefore, the Court refused to interfere with the impugned order and dismissed the instant appeal.
Case Title: KB Lal (Krishna Bahadur Lal) vs Gyanendra Pratap & Ors.
Case No.: Civil Appeal arising out of SLP No. 14974 of 2022
Citation: 2024 Latest Caselaw 216 SC
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Prasanna B. Varale
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com:
Picture Source :
