Back
SYED AFTAB HUSAIN RIZVI
Jokhan – Appellant
Versus
Murtuja – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SYED AFTAB HUSAIN RIZVI, J.
1. This Second Appeal is directed against an order of the learned Additional District Judge, Court No. 4 Mau, Misc. Case No. 103 of 2018 (Jokhan and Others vs. Murtaza and Others) rejecting an application to condone the delay in preferring an appeal from the judgment and decree of the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) Court No. 8 Azamgarh dated 24.01.1998 passed in Original Suit No. 540 of 1986.
2. Relevant facts for the decision of the second appeal are that respondents-plaintiffs filed a Suit for cancellation of sale deed and injunction against the appellants-respondents. In that original suit the appellants-respondents filed their counter claim seeking relief of possession and injunction against the plaintiffs-respondents. The learned trial court vide judgment and decree dated 24.01.1998 dismissed the original suit as well as the counter claim. This decree was challenged by the plaintiffs-respondents in civil appeal no. 54 of 1998 which was later transferred to the District Mau and numbered as Civil Appeal No. 20 of 2014 and is still pending. The appellants-defendants preferred an appeal belatedly under Section 96 of CPC against dismiss
Point of Law : Save as otherwise expressly provided in the body of this Code or by any other law for the time being in force, an appeal shall lie to the High Court from every decree passed in appeal ....
Point of Law : “Sufficient cause” is decisive factor while condoning delay.
The non-filing of an independent appeal as against a cross appeal arising from a single suit does not operate as res judicata, and lack of proper legal advice cannot be a ground to condone a signific....
The court ruled that delays in filing an appeal must be supported by compelling evidence, and unsatisfactory explanations can lead to dismissal of the request for condonation.
The court upheld the trial Court's discretion in condoning the delay in filing an appeal, emphasizing that the sufficiency of the cause shown is paramount, and the length of delay is immaterial.
Point of law : It is well-established that delay beyond the limitation period can be condoned if “sufficient cause” is shown by the party, especially if the party has not acted negligently or without....
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
