Administrative lethargy and internal negligence of a State agency do not constitute 'sufficient cause' for condonation of delay under the Limitation Act, and such agencies cannot be exempted from the bars of limitation due to their own lackadaisical attitude.

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.

CM APPL. 4030/2023:

1. An Application under Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’) has been filed on behalf of the Appellant Delhi Development Authority („DDA‟) seeking condonation of delay of 1600 days, in filing the present Appeal

2. It has been submitted in the Application that Appellant DDA is

aggrieved by impugned Judgment and Order dated 08.06.2018 passed by the learned ADJ in CS No.8536/2016. After passing of this Judgment, on 27.08.2018, the Appellant received the file along with Judgment from the Counsel. For taking appropriate steps, file was examined by the Officials of the Appellant for exploring the option either filing Appeal or mandatory / necessary compliance, in terms of Judgment dated 08.06.2018.

3. A meeting took place on 16.11.2018, but thereafter, the file of the case remained unattended till 24.12.2019. File was traced on the table of an employee, who retired from service on 31.07.2019.

4. Thereafter, the file was submitted for taking appropriate action to avoid contempt and Administrative Branch of the Appellant, could not take decision to prefer Appeal. The matter was referred to the Legal Department on 24.06.2021, who gave its opinion on 01.07.2021. Again, meeting was convened on 11.10.2021 before the Commissioner, Housing and it was agreed to prefer an Appeal against the impugned Judgment dated 08.06.2018 and case was assigned to the Counsel, who returned the file on 20.12.2022.

5. This decision to prefer the Appeal was taken on 02.01.2023, on the ground that the acceptance of the Judgment would create a precedent, for no fault of the Appellant. In addition, there is already CBI inquiry in allotment of flats in these kinds of cases of wrong address policy and some unscrupulous persons get allotment of flats, in connivance with DDA Officials.

6. Accordingly, the Commissioner Housing reiterated on 02.01.2023 for filing the Appeal and on the same day, the case was assigned to the Counsel, who received the file on 09.01.2023. Thereafter, Appeal was drafted and sent to the Appellant, for verification of facts and Appeal was filed at the

earliest.

7. It is submitted that Appellant DDA is a statutory body and due to petty lapses on the part of its functionary Officials of the Department, it resulted into delay in filing this Appeal, which may be condoned, as DDA is a Public Institution / Organization, which must not be not made to suffer. Appellant is Government functionary and part of the State having obligation and responsibility of wide areas and issues, on account of which, present Appeal could not be filled in time. Though there is undue delay, the graceful condonation of delay in view of not letting the State to suffer on account of petty lapses on the part of individual functionaries, is not deniable. Hence, delay of 1600 days may be condoned.

8. In support of this Application, Affidavits dated 02.05.2024 and 28.03.2025 have been filed on record, explaining the delay.

9. Learned counsel for the Respondent submits that delay cannot be condoned in view of Judgments relied upon by her in her Written Submissions.

10. The Respondent in the Written Submissions stated that the Appeal has been filed with a delay of four years, against the Judgment dated 08.06.2018. The timeline by the Appellant shows