Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA
G.S. Sandhawalia, CJ, Ranjan Sharma, J
Badardeen – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
G.S. Sandhawalia , C.J.
CMP (M) 1259 of 2024 has been filed for condoning the delay in filing the present appeal, since the judgment was passed by the learned Single Judge on 21.12.2023 in CWPOA No. 3319 of 2020.
2. In the application, it is mentioned that the appeal could not be filed within time as there was vacation in the Court and mother-in-law of the appellant, who was residing in Kishtwar District, was suffering from geriatric disease, but later on she was detected with malignancy of cervix, due to which he had to visit different hospitals for the treatment of his mother-in-law.
3. The application was contested by the respondents-State by filing reply, wherein the averments made in the application were denied.
4. Keeping in view the settled principles of law laid down in Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag Vs. Smt. Katiji and others, (1987) 2 SCC 107 , that each and every day’s delay is not to be explained, we are of the considered opinion that the application is liable to be allowed as sufficient cause has been made out. Accordingly, the application is allowed and delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
5. However, we are not inclined to interfere with the order pass
The court emphasized that negligence in litigation cannot be condoned beyond statutory limits, reinforcing the principle of timely action in legal proceedings.
An application for condonation of delay must demonstrate plausible reasons; mere bureaucratic delays do not justify extending time limits for appeals.
The law of limitation binds all parties, including the government, and requires reasonable explanations for delays in filing appeals.
The court emphasized strict adherence to the Limitation Act, dismissing the appeal due to insufficient cause for delay in filing.
The court determined that the appellant sufficiently explained the 204-day delay in filing the appeal, emphasizing that each case's facts dictate the condonation of delay.
Sufficient cause must be demonstrated for condonation of delay; bureaucratic inefficiencies do not qualify as valid reasons under law, as legal deadlines apply equally to all parties.
The State must demonstrate diligence in prosecuting matters and cannot claim a separate period of limitation; a liberal approach to condonation of delay must consider the party's conduct.
The court emphasized that delays in filing appeals must be justified with valid explanations, particularly for governmental entities, and that mere bureaucratic inefficiencies do not warrant leniency....
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
