Rakesh Kumar vs Dayachand
2025 Latest Caselaw 2123 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Rakesh Kumar vs Dayachand on 25 February, 2025

                                           1/2




             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                     SA No. 69 of 2021

                       RAKESH KUMAR versus DAYACHAND
                                       Order Sheet


25/02/2025                Mr. Alok Kumar Dewangan, counsel for the appellant.
                          Mr. Malay Shrivastava, counsel for respondents 1 to 4.

Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, counsel for respondent No.5(i). Ms. Mandvi Bharadwaj, Panel Lawyer for the State/ respondent No.6 Heard on IA No.01/2021, application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is a rustic villager and his counsel did not inform him about the judgment and decree passed by the first appellate Court. After two years, when he contacted the counsel, then only he came to know about dismissal of his appeal. Thereafter the appellant obtained documents to file instant appeal. He would further submit that delay is not malafide, rather the appellant wants to contest the case on merit, hence, the application may be allowed.

Per contra, learned counsel for respondents 1 to 4 submits that certified copy of judgment and decree passed by the first appellate Court was obtained by the appellant on 08.12.2020, but instant appeal has been filed on 09.3.2021, which itself shows that the delay is not bonafide, hence, the

BINI by BINI PRADEEP PRADEEP Date: 2025.02.25 16:24:11 +0530

application is liable to be rejected or by imposing heavy cost, the application may be allowed.

Learned counsel for respondent No.5(i) has no objection in allowing aforesaid application.

The appellant has filed instant appeal after the delay of 02 years and 03 months. Having considered the contention of learned counsel for the respondents that though the delay is not found to be bonafide, but filing the appeal itself shows that the appellant wants that the case to be decided on merit. If the delay is occurred due to non-interest of the counsel, then party could not be held liable for the same. However, sufficient cause has not been shown by the appellant to file the appeal belatedly, but sufficient cause can be drawn when intention of the appellant also that he wants to cause delay in deciding the case, but in the instant case, the appellant himself is plaintiff and his civil suit as well as appeal were dismissed by the trial Court as well as first appellate Court. Hence, the appellant himself is an aggrieved party, therefore, it cannot be said that the appeal has been filed belatedly with malafide intention.

Having considered the aforesaid facts, in the interest of justice, IA No.01/2021 is allowed, subject to payment of cost of Rs.2,000/- payable by the appellant in the account of High Court Legal Services Committee, within 10 days from today.

Call for the record of the trial Court as well as first appellate Court.

Sd/-

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge

Bini