A sufficient cause must be shown to condone delay in filing applications, with a liberal interpretation applicable in cases affected by extraordinary circumstances like a pandemic.

JUDGMENT

Ajithkumar, J.

The appellant filed I.A.No.3 of 2021 in O.S.No.13 of

2018 on the file of the Sub Court, Hosdurg, seeking to set aside the exparte decree passed in the suit on 04.02.2019. There occurred a delay of 978 days in filing that application. Therefore the appellant filed I.A.No.3 of 2021 to condone the delay. The Sub Court did not accept the reasons stated by the appellant as a sufficient cause and refused to condone the delay. I.A.No.2 of 2021 was thereby dismissed. Consequently, I.A.No.3 of 2021 was also dismissed. The appellant challenges the said orders in this appeal filed under Order XLIII, Rule

1(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

2. On 22.12.2021, this Court admitted this appeal directing notice to the respondents. Execution of the decree in O.S.No.13 of 2018 was stayed for a period of one month. That order was extended from time to time.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and also the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

4. The suit was filed for specific performance of a contract for sale. The appellant, who is the sole defendant in the suit, entered appearance through a counsel, but he was not able to come from the Gulf country, where he has been working, due to the restrictions on account of COVID-19 pandemic. Since he failed to appear before the court, the suit happened to be decreed exparte. By the time he could manage to come to India for a short period and get an application to set aside the exparte decree, filed through his Power of Attorney, there occurred a delay of 978 days. Pointing out those facts, the appellant contended that there was sufficient reason to condone the delay.

5. The original respondent-plaintiff died. His legal representatives, who got impleaded objected to the applications. They refuted the case set forth by the appellant. It was contended that having entered appearance in the suit and availed time to file written statement more than once, his absence before the court is purposeful and the delay is not condonable. Therefore, the appellant cannot be heard to contend that there was sufficient cause for his non-

appearance in court and delay.

6. The Power of Attorney holder of the appellant was examined as PW1. No document was produced by either side. After considering the evidence and hearing both sides, the view taken by the Sub Judge is that having filed Vakalath by the appellant in the suit and repeatedly taken time to file written statement, the plea raised by the appellant cannot be said bonafide. Even after appearing in the petition filed under Section 28 (3) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 which was filed by the respondents for getting the sale deed executed, the appellant did not immediately file an application to set aside the decree which would certainly substantiate the laches on his part.

7. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents after pointing out the incidents transpired during the proceedings of the suit submitted that there was no reason to condone the delay or to set aside the decree. The learned counsel further would submit that as per the order of the court, the respondents have deposited huge amounts towards stamp duty and registration fees and got the sale deed executed. After undergoing all such ordeal, which were in the knowledge of the appellant, there is no justification for him to file I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2021.

8. Records of the case would reflect that the appellant had entered appearance in the suit through a counsel by filing vakalath. Successive applications were filed to get time for filing written statements. It is also evident that the appellant was aware of the proceedings initiated by the respondents under Section 28 (3) of the Specific Relief Act; a learned counsel filed a memo of appearance for and on behalf of the appellant in that proceedings as well. Despite that, as a matter of fact, the appellant was held up in the Gulf during the said period. The above things were done by him through a power