Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR, J
MANJU DEVI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CW / 17584 / 2024
Order :
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 24.11.2020 (Annex.12), whereby the appellate authority dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has preferred an appeal against the order dated 21.01.2020 before the respondent No.2-Appellate Authority. He further submits that the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed on the ground of delay despite there being a clear direction from Hon’ble the Supreme Court to condone delay of the period which the country was facing pandemic of Covid-19. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition may be allowed and the order dated 24.11.2020 passed by the Appellate Authority may be quashed and set aside.
3. Per contra, learned counsel for the State submits that the Appellate Authority has rejected the appeal of the petitioner being time barred and, therefore, no interference in warranted.
4. I have considered the submissions made before this Court and have gone through the relevant record of the case.
5. The appeal preferred against the order dated 21.01.2020 has been dismissed by the Appellate Authority by passing order dated 24.11.2020 on the ground of delay. It is a fact that the country was facing pandemic Covid-19 and during the relevant period, Hon’ble the Supreme Court vide its order dated 23.03.2020 and thereafter vide order dated 10.01.2022 has specifically directed to all the authorities to condone the delay during the period of pandemic.
6. In the considered opinion of this Court, learned Appellate Authority has committed an error while rejecting the appeal preferred by the petitioner on the ground of limitation/delay.
7. In view of the discussion made above, the present writ petition is allowed and the order dated 24.11.2020 (Annex.12) passed by the Appellate Authority is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the appellate authority for deciding the same afresh in accordance with law.
8. The petitioner shall appear before the appellate authority on or before 12.03.2025 and if the petitioner appears before the appellate authority on or before 12.03.2025, the appellate authority shall consider and pass appropriate order on the appeal preferred by the petitioner on its merits.
The court ruled that delays in appeals due to the pandemic must be condoned as directed by the Supreme Court, emphasizing adherence to legal standards.
The court established that inordinate delays in litigation must be justified with substantial evidence, and failure to do so results in dismissal of petitions.
Plausible reasons for delay can be considered for condonation of delay, and each day's delay is not required to be explained as per legal precedent.
The court emphasized that in cases affected by the Covid-19 pandemic, the rigid application of the law of limitation is not necessary.
The Supreme Court's directives on limitation during the COVID-19 pandemic are binding and must be applied in tax return filings.
An appeal that is time-barred cannot be entertained without a proper application for condonation of delay, and such a defect is curable if addressed promptly.
The court held that the application for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act should be construed liberally to ensure substantial justice, especially when the delay is influenced....
An application for condonation of delay must provide a valid and justifiable explanation for the delay, and vague or misleading statements in the affidavit will not suffice.
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
