Gujarat High Court
Jadeja Batuksinh Madarsinh @ Madhubha ... vs Patel Mansukhlal Nagji on 15 December, 2023
Author: Gita Gopi
Bench: Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/2737/2022 ORDER DATED: 15/12/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 2737 of
2022
In
F/SECOND APPEAL NO. 27604 of 2022
==========================================================
JADEJA BATUKSINH MADARSINH @ MADHUBHA THROUGH POA
JADEJA JAYDEEPSINH RANJITSINH
Versus
PATEL MANSUKHLAL NAGJI
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MAHESH K POOJARA(5879) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR NIRAV C SANGHAVI(5950) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1,10,11,4,5,6,7,8,9
SERVED BY AFFIX. (R) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 15/12/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application has been filed
for condonation of delay of 82 days caused in
filing the Second Appeal.
2. As per record, Rule has been served. The
prayer is made to condone the delay of 82 days to
prefer Second Appeal submitting that only after
receiving the certified copies of both the
judgments, necessary legal advise was sought for,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/2737/2022 ORDER DATED: 15/12/2023
undefined
and further the pandemic affected the mobility,
and the applicants had to make arrangement for
the funds for legal expenses, hence, the delay of
82 days occurred.
3. 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 meaning- ful 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/2737/2022 ORDER DATED: 15/12/2023
undefined
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:-
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 con-
doned 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.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/2737/2022 ORDER DATED: 15/12/2023
undefined
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 account of its
power to legalize injustice on
technical grounds but because it is
capable of removing injustice and is
expected to do so."
4. 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 82 days
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/2737/2022 ORDER DATED: 15/12/2023
undefined
caused in filing the Second Appeal is condoned.
The application is allowed.
(GITA GOPI,J)
Pankaj
