Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN, BENCH AT JAIPUR
ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Sabuddin, S/o Late Sh. Allanoor – Appellant
Versus
Giriraj, S/o. Kalu – Respondent
Order :
ANOOP KUMAR DHAND, J.
| INDEX | |
| (1) | Contentions of the petitioner |
| (2) | Contentions by rival side |
| (3) | Discussions, Analysis & Findings |
| (4) | Conclusion & Directions |
The fundamental purpose of prescribing limitation is to bring closure to litigation, thereby ensuring that legal disputes are resolved in a timely manner and that perpetual uncertainty is prevented.
1. By way of filing this writ petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 21.04.2023 passed by the Board of Revenue (for short, ‘the Board’), by which the appeal submitted by the petitioners against the judgment dated 04.11.2010 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority (for short, ‘RAA’) has been rejected.
Contentions of the petitioner:
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the suit filed by the petitioners for correction of entries in the revenue record was decreed by the Court of Sub Divisional Officer (for short, ‘SDO’) on 29.07.1964. Counsel submits that after a period of 44 years, a time barred appeal was submitted by the respondent against the said judgment before the RAA, without submitting an application under Section 5 of the LIMITATION ACT seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal. C
An appellate court cannot entertain a time-barred appeal without first condoning the delay in accordance with the Limitation Act.
The appellate authority lacks jurisdiction to decide a time-barred appeal on merits without first condoning the delay as required by law.
The court reiterated that the burden of proving sufficient cause for delay in filing an appeal lies with the appellant, and mere ignorance or reliance on counsel is insufficient.
The court emphasized strict adherence to the Limitation Act, dismissing the appeal due to insufficient cause for delay in filing.
The court ruled that mere negligence and lack of diligence do not constitute sufficient cause for condoning delay in filing an appeal under the Limitation Act.
The court held that administrative delays are insufficient for condoning significant delays in appeals, emphasizing the importance of strict adherence to limitation laws and the necessity for bona fi....
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
