SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 23935

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J
Gautam – Appellant
Versus
Gadarai – Respondent
MCC No. 778 of 2026|MCC No. 312 of 2022|SA No. 347 of 2009



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shikhar Sharma
For the Respondents: Priti Kaushik, Shivendu Pandya, Pranjal Shukla

The court will not condone an extraordinary delay in complying with a judicial order if the applicant fails to demonstrate 'sufficient cause' or diligent efforts to track the case status, regardless of claims regarding changed contact information.

Headnote:(A) Condonation of Delay - Sufficient Cause - Extraordinary delay of nearly three years in complying with a court order not satisfactorily explained by a change in contact number is not a sufficient cause for extension of time. (Para 4)

Issues: Whether the applicant provided sufficient cause for the extraordinary delay in complying with the court's order and filing the MCC.

Table of Content
1. application for condonation of delay and parties' submissions regarding the reasons for non-compliance. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. dismissal of application for failure to show sufficient cause for extraordinary delay. (Para 4)

CGHC010313322026 2026:CGHC:37425 Digitally ANKIT signed NAFR K SI U N M G A H Rb A K y N UM KI A T R SINGH

Order On Board

1. The instant MCC has been filed by the applicant along with the application for condonation of delay in filing the instant MCC seeking extension of time to comply with the order of this Court dated 20.10.2023 passed in MCC No.312 of 2022 which was filed for restoration of SA No. 347 of 2009.

2. Mr. Shikhar Sharma, learned counsel for the application would submit that the delay caused in filing the instant MCC is unintentional. He would also submit that to comply with the order of this Court passed on 20.10.2023 in MCC No. 312 of 2022, counsel tried to contact with the applicant but he could not make it as the contact number which was given by the application to his counsel got changed and on that account information could not be given to the application and the order dated 20.10.2023 could not be complied with within stipulated time. He would further submit that the applicant is an agriculturist and he was doing the agricultural activity and due to which he could not contact his counsel in relation to the status of the case and after knowing the status of the case the instant MCC has been filed, therefore, he prays for condonation of delay in filing the instant MCC and also for extension of time to comply with the order of this Court dated 20.10.2023.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents would oppose the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the application, it appears that MCC No.312 of 2022 was filed for restoration of S.A. No.347 of 2009 in which this Court has passed the order on 20.10.2023 for restoration of the said second appeal subject to payment of ₹2,000/- before the High Court Legal Service Committee and file proof thereof before this Court on or before 03.11.2023. The said order has not been complied with within the stipulated time and for the delay the reason stated by the learned counsel for the applicant that the due to contact number of the applicant got changed counsel could not inform said order passed in MCC No.312 of 2022 right in time. However, the instant MCC for extension of time has been filed on 07.08.2026 after about 3 years passing of MCC No.312 of 2022 and during that period there had been no communication between the applicant and the counsel regarding the case and even otherwise, the said delay of more than two years has not been satisfactorily explained. Furthermore, nothing has been stated by the learned counsel applicant that what efforts had been taken by applicant and the counsel to know the status of case. Since the applicant failed to show any "sufficient cause" for not complying with the order passed in MCC No.312 of 2022 and also for such an extraordinary delay i.e. almost 3 years in filing the instant MCC, the instant MCC is dismissed. No cost(s).

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top