Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIVEDITA P. MEHTA
Adolf Olegario Nazareth – Appellant
Versus
Sarpanch/Secretary Village Panchayat of Uccassaim-Paliem Punola – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith with the consent of and at the request of the learned counsel for the parties.
2. The instant Writ Petition invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 and Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed praying for directions from this court to set aside and quash the impugned order dated 30.12.2024 passed by the District Court, Panaji in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 152/2024. By way of the Impugned Order, the application filed by the petitioner under Section 5 of the Limitation Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was dismissed. The petitioner had filed an application seeking condonation of delay of 73 days in filing a Revision Application under Section 201B of the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994.
3. In a nutshell, the origin of the dispute can be traced back to a complaint filed by respondent no.2 against the petitioner before the Deputy Director of Panchayats, submitting therein that the petitioner had undertaken illegal construction on land bearing survey no. 20/1, 20/3 and 20/5 of the Village of Uccassaim, Bardez, Goa. Vide Judgment and Order dated 12.10.2021, the Deputy Director was pleas
The court emphasized that sufficient cause must be established for condonation of delay, irrespective of its length, and that merits of the case should not influence the decision.
The court reaffirmed that a liberal interpretation of 'sufficient cause' for condonation of delay is essential to ensure substantial justice, allowing a non-pedantic approach to procedural matters.
Point of Law : Willful default, negligent attitude or casual approach in approaching the Court is not expected to be entertained.
The court emphasized that applications for condonation of delay should be decided on merits, prioritizing substantial justice over technicalities, especially when the delay is not due to negligence.
The court held that the appellate court improperly condoned a delay in filing the appeal without sufficient justification under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, as the limitation period had expired p....
The court emphasized that a request for condoning a delay must be supported by credible evidence, reiterating strict adherence to limitation laws and principles of public policy that discourage undue....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
