Monday, 18, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd vs Kajalben Fatesinh Vasava
2023 Latest Caselaw 8327 Guj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 8327 Guj
Judgement Date : 1 December, 2023

Gujarat High Court

Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd vs Kajalben Fatesinh Vasava on 1 December, 2023

Author: Gita Gopi

Bench: Gita Gopi

                                                                                 NEUTRAL CITATION




     C/CA/1989/2023                             ORDER DATED: 01/12/2023

                                                                                  undefined




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

 R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 1989 of
                             2023
                              In
                F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 33266 of 2023

==========================================================
                  RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD
                                 Versus
                       KAJALBEN FATESINH VASAVA
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RATHIN P RAVAL(5013) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI

                           Date : 01/12/2023

                             ORAL ORDER

1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicant.

2. By way of this application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the applicant has prayed for condonation of delay of 365 days occurred in preferring the appeal.

3. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that on receipt of the copy of the judgment and award, file was sent for legal opinion and because of the inter departmental process of seeking opinion and sanction and further, the necessity of depositing the statutory

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/CA/1989/2023 ORDER DATED: 01/12/2023

undefined

amount and for making arrangement of Court fees and other expenses, delay of 365 days has occurred in preferring the appeal.

4. In the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Another v. Mst. Katiji and Others reported in AIR 1987 SC 1353 it has been observed as under:-

"3. The legislature has conferred the power to condone delay by enacting Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act of 1963 in order to enable the Courts to do substantial justice to parties by disposing of matters on 'merits'. The expression "sufficient cause" employed by the legislature is adequately elastic to enable the courts to apply the law in a meaningful manner which subserves the ends of justice that being the life-purpose for the existence of the institution of Courts. It is common knowledge that this Court has been making a justifiably liberal approach in matters instituted in this Court. But the message does not appear to have percolated down to all the other Courts in the hierarchy. And such a liberal approach is adopted on principle as it is realized that:-

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/CA/1989/2023 ORDER DATED: 01/12/2023

undefined

1. Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late.

2. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this when delay is condoned the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties.

3. "Every day's delay must be explained" does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made.

Why not every hour's delay, every second's delay? The doctrine must be applied in a rational common sense pragmatic manner.

4. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of a non-deliberate delay.

5. There is no presumption that delay is occasioned deliberately, or on account of culpable negligence, or on account of mala fides. A litigant does not stand to benefit by resorting to delay. In fact he runs a serious risk.

6. It must be grasped that judiciary is respected not on

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/CA/1989/2023 ORDER DATED: 01/12/2023

undefined

account of its power to legalize injustice on technical grounds but because it is capable of removing injustice and is expected to do so."

5. Having heard the learned advocate for the applicant and considering the averments made in the application and as the delay is sufficiently explained and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the delay of 365 days occurred in filing the appeal deserves to be condoned and is hereby condoned.

6. Accordingly, the present application is allowed.

(GITA GOPI,J) Maulik

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter