Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DR JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH, MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN, JJ
Shanmugadurai, S/o. R. Iyyam Perumal Nadar – Appellant
Versus
B. Balakrishnan – Respondent
ORDER :
(C. Kumarappan J.)
The appellant herein is the first defendant before the learned Single Judge. The first respondent herein is the plaintiff, and the respondents 2 and 3 herein are the defendants 2 and 3 in C.S.No.624 of 2005.
2. CMP.No.6947 of 2022 is filed to condone the delay of 3814 days in filing the connected OSA, against the decree and judgment passed in C.S.No.624 of 2005 dated 15.06.2010. Similarly, CMP.No.6949 of 2022 is filed by the subsequent purchaser qua Mr.Shanmugadurai, being third party to the suit, seeking leave to file an appeal against the very same decree and judgment.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to according to their litigative status in C.S.No.624 of 2005.
4. The brief facts which are germane and give rise to the instant CMPs are as follows:-
(a). Originally, the first respondent herein filed a suit for specific performance in C.S.No.624 of 2005, wherein an ex parte decree was passed on 15.06.2010. Aggrieved with the said ex parte decree, the appellant herein filed an application to set aside the ex parte decree along with an application to condone the delay. The delay condonation application is A.No.2693 of 2011. The applic
The right to appeal is substantive; however, significant delay must be justified with bona fide reasons, which were not established in this case.
(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....
The court emphasized that the discretion to condone delay in filing an appeal is not a matter of right and must be exercised judiciously, considering the merits of the case only when sufficient cause....
(1) An order of Supreme Court, passed upon judicial consideration, attains finality unless set aside through appropriate appellate or review mechanisms.(2) Limitation - Delay should not be condoned m....
Point of Law : “Sufficient cause” is decisive factor while condoning delay.
The court held that sufficient cause must be shown to condone delay under the Limitation Act, and mere negligence of legal counsel does not qualify as such.
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
