S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
A. Santhanadevan – Appellant
Versus
Valli – Respondent
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:
N. Balakrishnan versus M. Krishnamurthy
N. Balakrishnan vs. M.Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123
Ram Nath Sao @ Ram Sahu & Others versus Gobardhan Sap & Others
C. Subraniam versus Tamil Nadu Housing Board rep. by its Chairman And Managing Director
Kandaswamy and four others vs. Krishnamandiram Trust, Karur, by its Trustees and 33 others
Postmaster General and others vs. Living Media India Limited and another
Ramlal and others vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd.
Ajit Singh Thakur Singh and anr. vs. State of Gujarat (1981) 1 SCC 495
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.