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

Shri Ramdev Automobiles vs Bhaumik Sureshbhai Galiyal
2023 Latest Caselaw 7132 Guj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 7132 Guj
Judgement Date : 27 September, 2023

Gujarat High Court
Shri Ramdev Automobiles vs Bhaumik Sureshbhai Galiyal on 27 September, 2023
Bench: Gita Gopi
                                                                                     NEUTRAL CITATION




     C/CA/1384/2023                                   ORDER DATED: 27/09/2023

                                                                                      undefined




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

 R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 1384 of
                            2023

                                    In
                      F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 25753 of 2023

==========================================================
                        SHRI RAMDEV AUTOMOBILES
                                 Versus
                       BHAUMIK SURESHBHAI GALIYAL
==========================================================
Appearance:
KAASH K THAKKAR(7332) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
TATVDEEP J JANI(7227) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI

                              Date : 27/09/2023

                               ORAL ORDER

1. The present application has been filed

for condonation of delay of 134 days caused in

filing the First Appeal.

2. Learned advocate for the applicant

states that the delay of 134 days occurred, since

the applicant as owner of the vehicle came to

know about the judgment and award only when the

notice was served, and, though there was

insurance policy, the applicant has been laid to

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/CA/1384/2023 ORDER DATED: 27/09/2023

undefined

pay the money by way of direction of pay and

recover. Advocate Mr. Thakkar submits that there

was no hazardous goods in the vehicle for

exonerating the insurance company, and, thus

states that the exoneration is on erroneous

ground, and after receiving the legal advise, the

appeal is preferred.

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

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/CA/1384/2023 ORDER DATED: 27/09/2023

undefined

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:-

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.

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/CA/1384/2023 ORDER DATED: 27/09/2023

undefined

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 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

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/CA/1384/2023 ORDER DATED: 27/09/2023

undefined

application and as the delay is sufficiently

explained and in view of the facts and

circumstances of the case, the delay of 134 days

caused in filing the First Appeal is condoned.

The application is allowed.

(GITA GOPI,J) Pankaj

 
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