Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR
M.M.NERLIKAR
M.S. Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Jai Bamleshwari Rice Industries – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M.M. NERLIKAR, J.
1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned counsel for the non-applicant.
2. The present application is for condonation of delay of 397 days in preferring the criminal appeal. The learned counsel for applicant submits that the applicant is Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited and due to administrative difficulties, the appeal could not be filed within time. He has invited my attention to paragraph Nos. 3 and 4 of the present application which read as under:-
“3 It is submitted that thereafter the certified copy was supplied to the office of the local counsel MSEDCL, Bhandara and the counsel had suggested that the necessary action against the said order can be taken by MSEDCL, and therefore the legal opinion was sought from the advocate on panel by MSEDCL.
4 It is submitted that the panel advocate suggested that the MSEDCL/Appellant can challenge the judgment before the Hon'ble High Court by filing the criminal appeal and therefore, the said matter was entrusted to the present Counsel for filing of criminal Appeal in the month of November. It is submitted that thereafter the present Advocate informed to MSEDCL Bhandar
The State's request for condonation of delay must be accompanied by a sufficient cause; bureaucratic inefficiencies do not justify tardiness in legal proceedings.
The law of limitation applies equally to the State and private parties, with bureaucratic inefficiency not sufficient for condoning delay.
The burden of proof lies on the applicant to provide sufficient cause for condonation of delay under the Limitation Act, and mere assertions are inadequate.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of providing a bona fide explanation for delay in filing an appeal, as required under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
The court emphasized the term 'sufficient cause' as a necessary condition for the extension of the prescribed period under the Limitation Act, highlighting the importance of providing adequate reason....
(1) Limitation – Condonation of delay – Phrase “within such period” signifies that period covered therein extends to not only original period within which, appeal or application, should have been fil....
The court established that the State must provide a reasonable explanation for delays in legal proceedings, as the law of limitation applies equally to all parties.
The main legal principle established in the judgment is the liberal interpretation of 'sufficient cause' for delay condonation, emphasizing the importance of substantial justice and the protection of....
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
