Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA
Bondada Perayya Guptha – Appellant
Versus
Vongeti Srinivasa Reddy – Respondent
ORDER :
Narsing Rao Nandikonda, J.
Heard Sri Prabhakar Peri, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri Karri Murali Krishna, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 in the revision petition.
2. Since, both the Civil Revision Petitions arising out of the same suit i.e., I.A.No.442 of 2012 in O.S.No.24 of 2008 and I.A.No.441 of 2012 in I.A.No.341 of 2011 in O.S.No.24 of 2008 on the file of learned I-Additional District Judge, Nalgonda OS No.24 of 2008, they are being disposed of by this Common order.
3. Both the interlocutory applications i.e., I.A.No.442 of 2012 and I.A.No.441 of 2012 and were filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, wherein I.A.No.442 of 2012 was seeking condonation of delay of 501 days in filing the petition for setting aside the ex parte preliminary decree, dated 31.08.2010 I.A.No.441 of 2012 is filed for condonation of 63 days delay in filing petition for setting aside the ex parte final decree dated 11.11.2011. Though both revisions are filed against the orders passed in both the interim applications, the contents of the petitions in both the cases are one and the same and can be dealt with together.
4. Brief facts of the case are that t
Judicial discretion in condoning delay must favor substantial justice over rigid adherence to timelines, though sufficient cause for delay must be demonstrated.
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.
Actual service of summons by registered post acknowledgment due is valid, even if defendants reside outside jurisdiction, and non-compliance with procedural rules does not equate to no service.
Failure to demonstrate sufficient cause for delay in setting aside an ex parte decree results in dismissal of the application, emphasizing diligence and valid service of summons.
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
