Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
VIKRAM AGGARWAL
Krishan Singh – Appellant
Versus
Kuldip Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Vikram Aggarwal, J.
Prayer in the present application preferred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is for condonation of delay of 2739 days in filing the appeal.
2. It has been averred in the application that the appellant was under the impression that the appeal had been filed on 09.02.2018 through an Advocate but on enquiry by the present counsel, through whom the present appeal has been filed, it was found that no appeal was registered or filed by the appellant after objections raised by the Registry. Thereafter, the said fact was brought to the knowledge of the earlier counsel, who informed the appellant that after objections having been raised by the Registry, the case file was misplaced and he could not file the appeal as the file was not traced out despite best efforts. A copy of the objections raised by the Registry in the appeal earlier filed by the appellant has been annexed as Annexure A-1. It has been averred that after arranging funds, the appellant engaged Mr. Dinesh Mahajan, Advocate and has filed the present appeal on 18.07.2025. It has been averred that under the circumstances, a delay of 2739 days in filing the appeal occurred.
3. I have heard lear
The court reaffirmed that a liberal interpretation of 'sufficient cause' for condonation of delay is essential to ensure substantial justice, allowing a non-pedantic approach to procedural matters.
Inordinate delay cannot be condoned without sufficient cause explaining each day's delay, substantiated by evidence; vague, unsubstantiated plea of family illness fails against rigorous limitation la....
The court held that the application for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act should be construed liberally to ensure substantial justice, especially when the delay is influenced....
The court ruled that mere negligence and inaction do not constitute sufficient cause for condoning a significant delay in filing an appeal.
The court emphasized that the law of limitation must be applied with all its rigours when the statute prescribes, and the court has no power to extend the period of limitation on equitable grounds.
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
