Back
M. G. PRIYADARSINI
Ushkila Laxmi – Appellant
Versus
Udutha Gopal – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Aggrieved by the order dated 22.03.2024 in I.A.No. 220 of 2022 in O.S.No. 61 of 2018 (hereinafter will be referred as ‘impugned order) passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge at Nagarkurnool (hereinafter will be referred as ‘Trial Court’), the petitioners/defendants have preferred the present Revision to set aside the impugned order, wherein the petition filed by them under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, was dismissed.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter are referred to as they are arrayed before the Trial Court.
3. The brief facts of the case, which necessitated the revision petitioners to file the present revision, are that the petitioners/defendants have filed I.A.No. 220 of 2022 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay of 1393 days in filing set aside petition. The reason assigned by the petitioners/defendants for the said delay is on 27.09.2018 when the suit was coming up for appearance of the defendants, the defendant No. 1 was suffering from ill health in covid-pandemic and she being lonely lady could not attend the Court. On the other hand, the respondent/plaintiff filed counter mainly contending that when the respondent/plai
The Court can only condone a delay if there is a "sufficient cause" behind such delay, and the reasons provided for the delay must not be non-serious or lacking in diligence.
Point of Law : Willful default, negligent attitude or casual approach in approaching the Court is not expected to be entertained.
The court emphasized that the sufficiency of the cause for delay, rather than its length, is the key criterion for condonation under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
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.
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 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....
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
