Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
RAJESH S.PATIL
Executive Engineer, Nandur Madhyameshwar Project, Nashik – Appellant
Versus
Sushilabai Mahadu Pagar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAJESH S. PATIL, J.
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2326 OF 2021
1. This Interim Application has been filed by the acquiring body for condonation of delay in filing the First Appeal.
2. I have heard learned Counsel for the respective parties and gone through the contents of the Interim Application. According to me, a case is made out to allow the present Interim Application.
3. Supreme Court in the judgment of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and another Vs. Mst. Katji and Others , 1987 SC 1353, has held that:
“Every day’s delay must be explained” does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. Why not every house’s delay. Every second’s delay ? The doctrine must be applied in a rational common sense pragmatic manner.”
4. Supreme Court in the case of S. Ganesharaju (Dead) through LRs Vs. Narasamma (Dead) through LRs. (2013) 11 SCC 341 , more specifically, paragraph Nos. 12 and 13, of the said judgment held that a liberal construction to the cause of delay should be given. The said paragraphs are reproduced herein below:
12. The expression “sufficient cause” as appearing in Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, has to be given a liberal construction so as to advance substan
The court emphasized a liberal approach to condonation of delay in filing appeals, prioritizing substantial justice over technicalities, provided sufficient cause is demonstrated.
Though the Courts are required to weigh scale of balance of justice in respect of both the parties, the said principle cannot be given a total good-bye in the name of liberal approach.
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
