Back
CHANDRA DHARI SINGH
Mauzi Ram Thr. Lrs – Appellant
Versus
Hoshiar Singh – Respondent
ORDER
Chandra Dhari Singh, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. No. 53935/2023 (delay in filing)
1. The instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicants/petitioners/appellants under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter "CPC") seeking the following reliefs:
"a. Condone the delay of 427days in filing of the present review petition and admit the same; and
b. Pass such other or further order as may be required in the facts and circumstances of the case."
2. The applicants/petitioners/appellants have filed the accompanying review petition bearing Review Petition No. 284/2023 in RFA No. 741/2002 seeking review of the impugned judgment dated 28th November, 2011, passed by the the Predecessor Bench of this Court, whereby it had upheld the preliminary decree dated 20th July, 2002 passed by the learned Trial Court in favour of the respondents.
3. The applicants/petitioners/appellants have filed the present application seeking condonation of delay of 427 days in fling the above said review petition.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants/petitioners/appellants submitted that the instant application has been filed w
The State must provide satisfactory reasons for delay in filing petitions; bureaucratic inefficiency is no excuse. Condonation of delay should not undermine the principles of timely justice.
The court ruled that local self-governments must adhere to limitation laws with no special exemptions and must provide adequate justification for any delay in filing petitions.
A delay in filing a legal proceeding cannot be condoned based solely on unsubstantiated allegations of lawyer negligence; the applicant must demonstrate sufficient cause and bona fide conduct before ....
The Court can only condone a delay if there is a "sufficient cause" behind such delay, and the reasons provided for the delay must not be non-serious or lacking in diligence.
The court ruled that a party cannot justify an inordinate delay in filing a review petition based on subsequent overruling of a prior decision, as it violates the principles of limitation and suffici....
The sufficiency of the cause for condoning delay is paramount, and a liberal interpretation of 'sufficient cause' is justified when no mala fides are present, despite the length of the delay.
The law of limitation is founded on public policy and statutes of limitation are enacted to ensure that parties approach the court for vindication of their rights without unreasonable delay.
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
