Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN CHANDER NEGI
Dharmender Singh – Appellant
Versus
Devi Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Bipin Chander Negi, J.
In the case at hand, a Civil Suit bearing No.53 of 2011 had been filed by present respondents No.1 to 3. In the suit so filed, sale deed executed by predecessor-in-interest of proforma respondents No.7 in favour of present petitioner and proforma respondent No.8, had been assailed. Petitioner No.1 along with predecessor-in-interest of proforma respondent No.7 and proforma respondent No.8 had filed a counter claim bearing No.79 of 2012, seeking relief of permanent prohibitory injunction against present respondents No.1 to 3.
2. The suit filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 was dismissed by the trial Court and the counter claim filed by the present petitioner and predecessor-in-interest of proformarespondent No.7 along with proforma respondent No.8 was decreed. The aforesaid two were decided by a common judgment and decree dated 30.05.2015.
3. Aggrieved by the same, respondents No.1 to 3 had preferred one appeal. Since two appeals were to be preferred against the common judgment and decree dated 30.05.2015, therefore on realizing the same, a fresh copy of judgment and decree dated 30.05.2015 was applied for. The same was supplied to respondents No.1
The court upheld the trial Court's discretion in condoning the delay in filing an appeal, emphasizing that the sufficiency of the cause shown is paramount, and the length of delay is immaterial.
Point of Law : Save as otherwise expressly provided in the body of this Code or by any other law for the time being in force, an appeal shall lie to the High Court from every decree passed in appeal ....
The concept of 'sufficient cause' for condoning delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction to advance substantial justice, and the length of delay is not a deci....
Unexplained delay cannot be condoned under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Point of law : It is well-established that delay beyond the limitation period can be condoned if “sufficient cause” is shown by the party, especially if the party has not acted negligently or without....
It is well-established that delay beyond the limitation period can be condoned if “sufficient cause” is shown by the party, especially if the party has not acted negligently or without bona-fides.
(1) Un-condonable delay - Un-condonable delay cannot be condoned in a routine manner by the Courts. Law of Limitation is substantive and the Rule is to institute the proceedings within the time limit....
A mere claim of Counsel's neglect does not suffice for condonation of delay without establishing sufficient cause; litigants maintain responsibility for timely action.
Point of Law : “Sufficient cause” is decisive factor while condoning 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
