Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(SC) 151

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ABHAY S. OKA, UJJAL BHUYAN, JJ.
THE CHIEF ENGINEER PWD ROADS ASSAM – Appellant
VERSUS
PRADIP KUMAR DAS & ORS. - Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).842 OF 2025 (ARISING OUT OF S.L.P (CIVIL) NO(S).21480 Of 2024)
Decided On : 20-01-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Arunabh Chowdhury, Sr. Adv., Mr. Raktin Gogai, Adv., Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR, Ms. Mamoni Das, Adv., Mr. Abhishek Roy, Adv., Ms. Shrika Gautam, Adv.
For the Respondents: Ms. Mukti Singh, AOR, Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, Adv.

The Supreme Court emphasized a justice-oriented approach in condoning delays in filing appeals, rejecting hyper-technicality in favor of substantive justice.

Headnote:(A) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 5 - Delay in filing appeal - The High Court dismissed the application for condonation of delay of 357 days in preferring an appeal against a money decree. The Supreme Court found that the High Court adopted a hyper-technical approach and should have taken a justice-oriented view. (Paras 2, 4, 5)

(B) Costs - The appellant is required to pay total costs of Rs.1,00,000/- to the first respondent, with Rs.50,000/- already deposited being adjusted towards this amount. (Paras 6, 7)

Facts of the case:
The appellant, original defendant no.4, suffered a money decree of Rs.2,98,76,518.39/- with interest at 6% per annum. There was a delay of 357 days in filing an appeal against this decree. (Para 2)

Findings of Court:
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment, condoned the delay, and allowed the appeal subject to the payment of costs. (Paras 5, 8)

Issues: The main issue was whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned based on the circumstances of the case. (Para 4)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the High Court should have adopted a more liberal and justice-oriented approach rather than a hyper-technical one in considering the application for condonation of delay. (Para 4)

Result: Appeal allowed.

ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant is the original defendant no.4. The appellant has suffered a money decree in the sum of Rs.2,98,76,518.39/- (Rupees Two Crore Ninety-eight Lakh Seventy-six Thousand Five Hundred Eighteen and Thirty-nine paise) with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. There was a delay of 357 days in preferring a substantive appeal against the decree before the High Court. By the impugned judgment, the High Court has dismissed the application for condonation of delay.

3. The appellant has deposited 50 per cent of the decretal amount in terms of the interim order passed by this Court before the executing Court. The appellant has deposited a sum of Rs.2,34,53,066/- (Rupees Two Crore Thirty-four Lakh Fifty-three Thousand and Sixty-six). A sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) has been deposited by the appellant on 24th September, 2024 for meeting the litigation cost of the first respondent.

4. After having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, we are of the view that the High Court ought to have adopted a justice oriented and liberal approach and condoned the delay in the facts of the case. Perhaps, the High Court has adopted a hyper-technical approach.

5. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned judgment and condone the delay of 357 days in preferring the appeal against the decree of the Trial Court. Accordingly, IA (Civil)/2072/2024 is allowed.

6. Delay is condoned subject to condition of the appellant paying the total costs of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) to the first respondent within a period of six weeks from today. The sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) deposited by the appellant in this Court towards litigation cost shall be adjusted towards the costs amount. We permit the first respondent to withdraw the amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand). The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent to communicate the bank details of the first respondent to the learned Advocate-on-Record appearing for the appellant. The remaining amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) shall be transferred directly to the bank account of the first respondent within a period of six weeks from today.

7. The 50 per cent of the decretal amount deposited by the appellant shall be permitted to be withdrawn by the first respondent subject to the first respondent furnishing a bank guarantee for the said amount to the satisfaction of the executing Court. The deposit of 50 per cent of the decretal amount and withdrawal thereof shall be subject to final outcome of the appeal before the High Court.

8. The Appeal is, accordingly, allowed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document