Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
CHANDRA KUMAR RAI
Jiledar – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. initial proceedings and consent of parties recorded. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. contentions regarding the appeal process and delay condonation. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. court’s observations on appeal's limitation and legal requirements. (Para 8 , 9 , 11) |
| 4. legal finder's emphasis on proper procedural adherence. (Para 10 , 12) |
| 5. final order for appeal handling and timeline. (Para 13) |
JUDGMENT :
Chandra Kumar Rai, J.
1. Vakalatnama filed on behalf of respondent no.5 is taken on record.
2. Heard Mr. V.K. Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Shivam Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Rajesh Yadav as well as Ms. Ruchi Mishra, learned counsels for respondent no.4 and 5, Mr. Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for respondent- Gaon Sabha and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
3. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the instant petition is being heard finally without inviting counter affidavit.
4. The instant petition has been filed for the following relief:-
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 6.1.2025 passed by Board of Revenue, Lucknow in case No. Rev/929/2024/Jaun
An application for condonation of delay in appeal must be resolved before merits consideration; an appeal without such a ruling is legally unsustainable.
The appellate authority lacks jurisdiction to decide a time-barred appeal on merits without first condoning the delay as required by law.
The court emphasized that delays in filing appeals should be condoned to ensure substantial justice, overriding technical limitations.
The court ruled that procedural delays should be examined contextually, emphasizing the need for justice over strict adherence to timelines, allowing case merits to guide decisions.
Application for mutation – Condonation of delay - The term "sufficient cause" is to receive liberal construction to advance substantial justice, when no negligence, inaction or want of bona fide is a....
A formal application for condonation of delay is not necessary; oral requests sufficing with sufficient cause are valid in proceedings under the U.P. Land Revenue Act.
An application for condonation of delay must be decided before the merit of the appeal is addressed, ensuring compliance with procedural rules.
A formal application for condonation of delay under the Limitation Act is not mandatory if sufficient cause is shown, allowing courts to exercise discretion in restoring cases.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the need for a liberal approach in matters relating to condonation of delay, emphasizing the importance of substantial justice and not denying p....
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
