Smt. D. Chinamma Reddy @T. Chinama vs T. Saraswati Reddy @ P. Saraswati
2025 Latest Caselaw 823 Ori

Orissa High Court

Smt. D. Chinamma Reddy @T. Chinama vs T. Saraswati Reddy @ P. Saraswati on 2 July, 2025

Author: Sashikanta Mishra

Bench: Sashikanta Mishra

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                  RSA No. 200 of 2023

            Smt. D. Chinamma Reddy @T. Chinama ....             Appellant
            Reddy                                        Represented by
                                             Mr. B. Panigrahi, Advocate

                                        - Versus -

            T. Saraswati Reddy @ P. Saraswati               ....        Respondents
            Reddy & Others                                          Represented by
                                                         Mr. A. Tripathy, Advocate

                  CORAM:
                       JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA

                                             ORDER

02.07.2025

I.A. No.529 of 2023 Order No.

04. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. . 2. This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the Second Appeal. SR has pointed out delay of 1940 days. Said delay is sought to be explained by citing the ground that the petitioner- appellant was seriously ill and was not keeping well as she was suffering from various ailments. She was on medical supervision from 10.03.2017 to 02.04.2023. Thereafter, she applied for certified copy of the impugned judgment on 02.05.2023 and contacted her lawyer to prefer the appeal. It is submitted that the delay is not deliberate or willful but due to circumstances beyond her control.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the defendants opposes the prayer for condonation of delay by submitting that the delay has not been properly explained.

4. After perusing the application and upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court is not satisfied that the delay has been properly condoned. In fact, the so called ground of illness cited by the petitioner-appellant is not convincing enough to explain the huge delay of 1940 days. As such, I am not inclined to condone the delay. The I.A. is rejected.

5. Consequently, the Second Appeal stands dismissed.

(Sashikanta Mishra) Judge

Puspanjali

Designation: Junior Stenographer

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 03-Jul-2025 18:03:18