Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
K.MURALI SHANKAR
State of Tamil Nadu, rep.by The District Collector, Thoothukudi – Appellant
Versus
Jothi Lakshmi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of factual background and proceedings. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. response to delay condonation petition. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 3. procedural consideration of delay condonation. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. analysis of the grounds for delay and parties' arguments. (Para 12 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 5. legal principles guiding condonation of delay. (Para 20 , 21) |
| 6. final ruling on the petition. (Para 23 , 24) |
ORDER :
K.MURALI SHANKAR, J.
The above application has been filed under Order XLI, Rule 3(A) of C.P.C. , to condone the delay of 4863 days in filing the second appeal, challenging the judgment and decree made in A.S.No.15 of 2007, dated 18.06.2008 on the file of the Additional District Court, Thoothukudi, reversing the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.9 of 2005, dated 10.01.2006 on the file of the Sub Court, Kovilpatti.
2.The respondent as plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.9 of 2005, claiming the reliefs to declare that the suit properties are belonging to the plaintiff and for consequential permanent injunction, restraining the defendant and their men from in any manner interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property.
3
Delay in filing a second appeal cannot be condoned without sufficient cause; administrative reasons and natural calamities must be substantiated with evidence.
Insufficient cause for condoning the delay in filing an appeal under Section 5 of the Limitation Act leads to dismissal of the appeal.
The court emphasized that a request for condoning a delay must be supported by credible evidence, reiterating strict adherence to limitation laws and principles of public policy that discourage undue....
The court ruled that the petitioners failed to establish sufficient cause to condone a 1325-day delay in filing an appeal, emphasizing the necessity of a bona fide explanation under the Limitation Ac....
The government must provide a substantial explanation for delays in legal actions, and mere claims of public interest do not justify excessive negligence or inaction.
Sufficient cause must be shown for condonation of delay under the Limitation Act; mere bureaucratic negligence is inadequate.
Period of limitation – Condonation of delay – No event or circumstance arising after expiry of limitation can constitute sufficient cause – Expression ‘sufficient cause’ cannot be liberally interpret....
The court held that the appellants' explanation for the delay in filing the appeal was not satisfactory and that they were aware of the judgment and decree of the lower appellate court, as evidenced ....
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
