SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Guj) 1326

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
BIREN VAISHNAV, NISHA M. THAKORE, JJ.
Dilipbhai Kantilal Patel & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
Udaji Kanaji Thakor & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Application (For Bringing Heirs) No. 1 of 2020 In R/First Appeal No. 2597 of 2024 With Civil Application (For Bringing Heirs) No. 1 of 2023 In R/First Appeal No. 2597 of 2024 With Civil Application (For Condonation of Delay) No. 2 of 2023 In R/First Appeal No. 2597 of 2024
Decided On : 18-07-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Varun Bharda for Mr. S.P. Majmudar.
For the Respondents:Mr. Shalin Mehta, Senior Advocate With Ms. Aditi S. Raol.

The court established that a liberal approach should be taken in condoning delays in procedural matters to ensure that justice is served.

Headnote:

Condonation - Civil Procedure - Limitation Act Section 5 - The court interpreted Section 5 of the Limitation Act to allow for a liberal approach in condoning delays in bringing legal heirs on record, emphasizing the importance of substantial justice over strict adherence to timelines.

Fact of the Case:

The original appellant passed away during the pendency of an appeal, prompting the need to bring his legal heirs on record. The applicants sought to condone a significant delay in doing so, citing lack of knowledge about the death of the opponents.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the applicants provided a sufficient explanation for the delay and that the legal heirs were necessary parties to the appeal. The court emphasized a liberal interpretation of the Limitation Act to advance substantial justice.

Issues: Whether the delay in bringing the legal heirs of the deceased opponents on record could be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, and whether the heirs were necessary parties to the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the principles for condoning delay should be applied liberally, focusing on the sufficiency of the explanation rather than the length of the delay, especially when no mala fide intention was present.

Result: The applications for condonation of delay and for bringing heirs on record were allowed.

ORDER :

Nisha M. Thakore, J.

ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR BRINGING HEIRS) NO. 1 of 2020:

1. With the consent and joint request of learned advocates for the respective parties, this matter is taken up for final hearing.

2. We have heard learned advocate Mr. Varun Bharda appearing for Mr. S.P. Majmudar, learned advocate on record for the applicants, learned Senior Advocate Mr. Shalin Mehta appearing with Ms. Aditi Raol, learned advocate on record for opponent nos.6 to 10 and learned Senior Advocate Mr. Anshin H. Desai appearing with learned advocate Ms. Venu Nanavati for opponent no.11.

3. This application is filed by the original appellants/plaintiffs for bringing the legal heirs of the applicant/appellant- Kantilal Joytaram Patel in Civil Application No.1 of 2018 in F/First Appeal No.11156 of 2018 (registered as “R/First Appeal No. 2597 of 2024”). The original appellant- Kantilal Joytaram Patel is reported to have passed away on 04.11.2019 pending the restoration captioned appeal, which stood dismissed for default on 10.04.2018 and was subsequently restored on 29.04.2022.

4. Learned advocate for the applicant has invited our attention to the averments made in the application and has submitted that legal heirs and representatives of the deceased original appellant no.1 are already brought on record i.e. applicant nos.2 to 5. In such circumstances, there is no delay in preferring the present application and has, therefore, urged before us to allow this application and to permit the amendment to be carried out in the cause title to reflect the name of applicant nos.2 to 5 as also the legal heirs and representatives of deceased original appellant no.1. The reliance was placed on the copy of pedigree, which is annexed along with this application.

5. Learned advocates appearing for the respective opponents as such had not objected to grant of the present application.

6. Considering the fact that deceased applicant no.1 is already represented through the applicant nos.2 to 5, who are the legal heirs and representatives of the deceased applicant no.1, we are inclined to allow the present application. Since the restoration application is already disposed of, the legal heirs and representatives of the deceased applicant no.1 are permitted to be brought on record in captioned applications as well as captioned appeal.

7. The present civil application stands disposed of, in aforesaid terms.

ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 2 of 2023 AND CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR BRINGING HEIRS) NO. 1 of 2023:

1. Since all these applications essentially pertains to bringing heirs and legal representatives of deceased opponent nos.1 and 2, they are heard together and decided by this common order. These applications were taken up for hearing while hearing the main First Appeal on merits as the learned advocates for the respective parties have agreed to address the court on the merits of the case in the captioned First Appeal. Thus, civil applications are heard along with the main First Appeal.

2. Civil Application (For Condonation Of Delay) No. 2 of 2023 is preferred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay of 5860 days caused in bringing the legal heirs and representatives of opponent nos.1 and 2 and with a prayer to set aside the abatement, if any, in the facts of the case.

3. Civil Application (For Bringing Heirs) No. 1 of 2023 is filed seeking permission to join the proposed heirs and legal representatives of deceased opponent nos.1 and 2 in Civil Application No.1 of 2020 as well as in Civil Application No.1 of 2018 in F/First Appeal No.11156 of 2018 (registered as “R/First Appeal No. 2597 of 2024”).

4. We have heard learned advocate Mr. Varun Bharda appearing for Mr. S.P. Majmudar, learned advocate on record for the original appellants/plaintiffs, learned Senior Advocate Mr. Shalin Mehta appearing with Ms. Aditi Raol, learned advocate on record for opponent nos.6 to 10 and learned Senior Advocate Mr. Anshin H. Desai a

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    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

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top