Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B.BALAJI
P. Avoodaiammal, (died) – Appellant
Versus
P. Narayanan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. identification of parties and case background. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments for condoning delay due to insufficient representation. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. counterarguments regarding diligence in claims. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. legal standards for sufficient cause under limitation act. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. limits of judicial discretion; cases establishing precedent. (Para 17 , 20) |
| 6. trial court's dismissal upheld; insufficient cause. (Para 26) |
ORDER :
The defendants 1 and 2 in O.S.No. 45 of 2016 of the file of the Principal District Munsif, Alandur, are the revision petitioners. The petitioners challenge the order of the Trial Court, dismissing I.A.No. 353 of 2021, which was filed for condonation of delay of 1,080 days in filing the application to set aside the ex-parte decree dated 05.03.2018.
3. Mr.V.P.Senguttuvel, learned Senior Counsel, would first and foremost contend that although the delay appears to be huge, namely 1,080 days, the Trial Court failed to see that the petitioners had made out sufficient cause for condonation of the delay. Mr.V.P. Senguttuvel, learned counsel taking me through the affidavit filed in support of the condone delay application, would contend that
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.
Point of law: applicant, against whom an order is made under sub-rule (2) rule 105 or the opposite party against whom an order is passed ex-parte under sub-rule (3) of that rule or under sub-rule (1)....
The court held that mere reliance on counsel does not excuse delay in litigation; sufficient cause must be demonstrated for each day of delay to condone it.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for convincing and acceptable reasons for condonation of delay, emphasizing that the length of delay is not material, but the reasons stat....
Unexplained delay cannot be condoned under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
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
