Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J
Maniram S/o Shri Chaitram Sahu – Appellant
Versus
Ravindra Kumar Shrivastav S/o Shri Munna Lal Shrivastav – Respondent
Judgment :
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J.)
1) Heard on I.A. No. 2 of 2024, the application for condonation of delay in filing the instant appeal.
2) The award was passed by the learned Additional Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal, Kabirdham (C.G.) on 28.10.2023 and this appeal was preferred on 05.09.2024. There is a delay of 213 days in filing the instant appeal. In the application for condonation of delay, it is stated that the file was handed to a local counsel for filing the appeal but the said Advocate did not file the same. Thereafter, the appellant approached the present counsel on 04.09.2024, who filed the appeal on 05.09.2024.
3) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that as the file was handed over to another Advocate and he failed to file the appeal, therefore, the appeal could not be filed within limitation.
4) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respective respondents would oppose. They would submit that the appellant has not explained the delay properly.
5) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6) In the application for condonation of delay, the appellant has not mentioned the date of award; the date when he applied for the certified c
Litigants must exercise due diligence in legal proceedings; mere negligence of counsel does not justify condoning delays in filing appeals under the Limitation Act.
The court emphasized a liberal approach in assessing sufficient cause for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, particularly when the delay is marginal and does not prejudice th....
(1) Un-condonable delay - Un-condonable delay cannot be condoned in a routine manner by the Courts. Law of Limitation is substantive and the Rule is to institute the proceedings within the time limit....
Inordinate delay cannot be condoned without sufficient cause explaining each day's delay, substantiated by evidence; vague, unsubstantiated plea of family illness fails against rigorous limitation la....
The court held that mere excuses do not constitute sufficient cause for condoning a significant delay in filing an appeal, emphasizing the need for diligence in pursuing legal remedies.
Government bodies must provide reasonable explanations for delays in filing appeals, as the law of limitation applies equally to all litigants, including the State.
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
