SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(HP) 246

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
SUSHIL KUKREJA, J.
LAC & Anr. - Applicants
Versus
Prem Prakash & Ors. - Respondents
CMP(M) No. 1685 of 2025
Decided On : 24-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicants :Mr. Manoj Chauhan, Additional Advocate General.

Inordinate delay of nearly two years not condoned due to lack of day-to-day explanation; natural disasters and administrative delays insufficient without proving diligence and bona fides, even for government applicants.

Headnote:(A) Limitation Act, 1963 - Section 5 - Condonation of delay - Application for condonation of delay of one year, eleven months and four days in filing appeal against award of Reference Court - Timeline of file movement from receipt of certified copy on 28.08.2023 provided - Severe flooding, infrastructure damage, staff deployment for restoration, transfer of Assistant Engineer and promotion of dealing hand cited as reasons post 04.10.2023 - No explanation offered for delay from 04.10.2023 to 08.04.2025 when matter listed in Sessions Court - Law of limitation to be applied with rigour; sufficient cause must explain each day's delay - No latitude for government without public interest or fraud shown - Inordinate delay not properly explained; application lacks bona fides and particulars. (Paras 1, 3, 7, 8)

(B) Limitation Act, 1963 - Section 5 - Principles - Law founded on public policy to suppress fraud, quicken diligence; courts powerless to extend on equitable grounds - Liberal approach for short delays, stricter for inordinate; negligence or inaction disentitles condonation - Length of delay immaterial if explanation satisfactory. (Paras 3, 4, 5, 6)

Facts of the case:
Application filed for condonation of delay in filing appeal against decision of Reference Court dated 11.08.2023. Certified copy received 28.08.2023, forwarded through departmental channels with delays due to flooding, staff redeployment, transfers. Matter surfaced on listing 08.04.2025, leading to legal opinions and filing.

Findings of Court:
No sufficient cause shown for major portion of delay; applicants failed to explain each day's delay; application vague and casual.

Issues: Whether sufficient cause established for condoning inordinate delay of one year, eleven months and four days, considering departmental hurdles and natural calamity.

Ratio Decidendi: Condonation requires adequate explanation preventing approach within time; inordinate unexplained delay, even by government, not condonable absent bona fides or diligence; flooding and administrative issues insufficient without day-to-day account. Result : Application dismissed; appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. delay attributed to administrative delays, flooding, and staff transfers. (Para 1)
2. inadequate, non-day-wise explanation for inordinate delay. (Para 2 , 7)
3. limitation law applied strictly; sufficient cause required, no govt latitude. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
4. condonation denied for lack of sufficient cause; appeal dismissed. (Para 8 , 9)

JUDGMENT :

Sushil Kukreja, J.

This order shall dispose of an application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of one year, eleven months and four days in filing the present appeal. As per the applicants, Reference Petition was decided by the Reference Court on 11.08.2023 and copy whereof, was applied by the District Attorney on the same day, which was attested on 26.08.2023 and delivered on 28.08.2023. The District Attorney, Shimla forwarded the certified copy of the award alongwith the case file to Executive Engineer, HPPWD, Karsog vide letter dated 05.09.2023, which was received at the Office of Executive Engineer, Karsog on 14.09.2023, who sent the case file to Assistant Engineer, HPPWD, Sub-Division Churag, vide letter No. 5299, dated 15.09.2023, which was received on 30.09.2023.Thereafter, the file was marked to Sh. Padam Nabh, Junior Engineer, Churag/Tattapani Section vide endorsement No. 441, dated 04.10.2023. In the meanwhile, the area experienced severe flooding due to heavy rainfall. The situation was critical, with residents facing displacement and considerable hardship. The overflowing of rivers/khads caused extensive damage to infrastructure, including roads and bridges, severely affecting mobility and access to essential services. Faced with this situation, all field staff was deployed for road clearance and restoration work. Subsequently, Assistant Engineer was transferred from HPPWD Sub-Division, Churag and the dealing hand also joined another office upon his promotion. In these circumstances, no steps could be taken for processing the matter for appeal. The Office of appellant No. 2 was not made aware of the status of the case until it was listed before the learned Sessions Court Camp at Karsog on 08.04.2025 and at the time of scrutiny, it was found that legal opinion from the competent authority was required. Hence, Executive Engineer, Karsog forwarded the matter to the Legal Cell of the office of Engineer-in-Chief vide letter dated 19.04.2025, which was received on 26.04.2025. Thereafter, the matter was further forwarded to the Government for seeking opinion of Law Department vide letter No. 242-44, dated 26.04.2025. The Secretary (PW) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh conveyed the opinion vide letter dated 20.06.2025 to the Office of Engineer-in-Chief, which was received on 24.6.2025, who further conveyed the opinion alongwith relevant case file to the Office of Executive Engineer, Karsog vide letter No. 823-24, dated 24.06.2025, which was received in his office on 28.06.2025. On receipt of the opinion of Government, the Executive Engineer, Karsog prepared and drafted the appeal and submitted the same to the Office of Engineer-in-Chief, HPPWD, Shimla vide letter dated 27.06.2025, which was received in his office on 28.06.2025. Some record was sought from field office and on its receipt, the same was vetted in his office on 04.07.2025 and the said office forwarded the same to the office of learned Advocate General vide letter dated 04.7.2025, who vetted the same on 07.07.2025. Thereafter, Executive Engineer, HPPWD Division Karsog submitted the fair appeal to the Superintending Engineer 1st Circle, HPPWD Mandi vide letter dated 08.07.2025 for signatures, being authorized signatory, who further sent the fair appeal duly signed, to the Office of learned Advocate General vide letter No. PW-SEI-R-24-7-C.C./Karsog/25-5121-23 dated 11.07.2025. In this way, delay of one year, eleven months and four days in filing the present appeal has occurred, which is neither intentional nor willful, but was beyond the control of the applicants, as






























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top