The court emphasized the importance of adhering to the law of limitation, balancing the rights of both parties, and adopting a liberal yet reasonable approach in condoning delay under section 5 of the Limitation Act.

Appellant has assailed the award dated 27.12.2013 rendered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chamba in MAC Petition No.84/2011 (279/2013). The appeal is barred by 267 days. The appellant has filed separate application under section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.

CMP (M) No.1820/2014

2. According to the averments contained in the application, award was made by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chamba on 27.12.2013. The applicant came to know about the award only on 28.11.2014 when he received summons in the Execution Petition. Thereafter, he visited the Tribunal and he was told that the award has been passed against him. He applied for the certified copy of award on 28.11.2014 and the same was supplied to him on the same day.

3. Case of the applicant, in a nutshell, is that he was never intimated by his counsel about the outcome of the case. The applicant was duly represented by the learned Advocate at the time of passing of the award on 27.12.2013. It is not believable that the applicant was not aware of the award since he was duly represented by the Advocate. The applicant has filed an appeal only when the execution has been carried of the award dated 27.12.2013.

4. It is true that the Court ought to be very liberal while considering the applications under section 5 of the Limitation Act, but at the same time the valuable rights accruing to the opposite party cannot be ignored. The applicant has not assigned sufficient reasons for the condonation of delay.

5. Their Lordships of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Oriental Aroma Chemical Industries Limited versus Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation and another, (2010) 5 SCC 459 have held that liberal approach in condoning delay of short duration and the strict approach in cases of inordinate delay should be applied. Their Lordships have held as under:

“14. We have considered the respective submissions. The law of limitation is founded on public policy. The legislature does not prescribe limitation with the object of destroying the rights of the parties but to ensure that they do not resort to dilatory tactics and seek remedy without delay. The idea is that every legal remedy must be kept alive for a period fixed by the legislature. To put it differently, the law of limitation prescribes a period within which legal remedy can be availed for redress of the legal injury. At the same time, the courts are bestowed with the power to condone the delay, if sufficient cause is shown for not availing the remedy within the stipulated time.”

6. Their Lordships of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Lanka Venkateswarlu (dead) by LRS versus State of Andhra Pradesh and others, (2011) 4 SCC 363 have held that the liberal approach in considering sufficiency of cause for delay should not override substantial law of limitation, especially when court finds no justification for delay. Their Lordships have held as under:

“19. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel. At the outset, it needs to be stated that generally speaking, the courts in this country, including this Court, adopt a liberal approach in considering the application for condonation of delay on the ground of sufficient cause under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. This principle is well settled and has been set out succinctly in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Ors. Vs. Katiji & Ors. ((1987) 2 SCC 107).

23. The concepts of liberal approach and reasonableness in exercise of the discretion by the Courts in condoning delay, have been again stated by this Court in the case of Balwant Singh (supra), as follows:-

"25. We may state that even if the term "sufficient cause" has to receive liberal construction, it must squarely fall within the concept of reasonable time and proper conduct of the party concerned. The purpose of introducing liberal construction normally is to introduce the concept of "reasonableness" as it is understood in its general connotati