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

2023 Supreme(Mad) 114

S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
A. Santhanadevan – Appellant
Versus
Valli – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mrs. D.Sathya

ORDER :

The Civil Miscellaneous Petition in CMP No.94 of 2023 is filed to condone the delay of 873 days in filing Appeal Suit against the Judgement and Decree dated 30.01.2019 in O.S.No.262 of 2015.

2. The reason stated by the revision petitioner is that he engaged an Advocate, who applied for the copies of the Judgement on 26.07.2021 and the copy was received on 11.08.2021 and thereafter, he arranged for funds and filed the Appeal Suit on 05.10.2021. However, the petitioner has not explained the delay of about two (2) years from the date of Judgement and Decree i.e., on 30.01.2019 and the date of application filed for receiving the copy of the Judgement on 26.07.2021.

3. Unexplained delay cannot be condoned in a routine manner and the delay from 30.01.2019 to 26.07.2021 remains unexplained and the said delay, which is enormous, cannot condoned by the Court.

4. The principles regarding the condonation of delay with reference to the judgements of the Constitutional Courts are elaborately considered by this Court in C.M.P.Nos.8358 & 8359 of 2018 in AS.SR.No.32087 of 2018 dated 09.12.2019 and the relevant paragraphs are extracted as under:

    “10. In respect of said contentions, the learned c

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top