A significant delay in filing an appeal requires strong justification, and vague claims do not suffice for condonation.

JUDGMENT

This petition has been filed seeking to condone the delay of 1815 days in filing the second appeal, challenging the judgment and decree passed by the first appellate court dated 09.12.2019 in A.S.No.55 of 2018.

2. According to the petitioner, he applied for certified copy of the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.55 of 2018 and the same was received by him on 16.07.2020. It is also stated by him that he met his counsel after receiving the judgment and decree and he was advised to file second appeal. The petitioner further stated that he is a resident of Erode and due to ignorance, he could not present the second appeal immediately by engaging a counsel at Chennai. Further, it is stated that he suffered from post-covid symptoms and subsequently affected with jaundice and hence, he was taking medical treatment. The petitioner also stated that he misplaced the papers and he could retrieve only the decree copy passed in the first appeal. Therefore, he applied for certified copy to get a fresh judgment copy and then he received the same on

06.03.2025 and thereafter, this second appeal has been filed.

3. Even as per the affidavit filed in support of the condone delay petition, it was clearly admitted by the petitioner that he got certified copy of the judgment and decree of A.S.No.55 of 2018 on 16.07.2020. However, present second appeal has been presented by the petitioner only on 7^th April 2025. The reasons given by the petitioner regarding his ignorance, misplacement of papers, illness due to jaundice are all cannot be taken as sufficient cause for explaining the delay of nearly 5 years in filing the second appeal. Further, the petitioner has not given the date of misplacement of the certified copy of the judgments and the date of retrieval etc. The vague allegations made by the petitioner in paragraph Nos.5 and 6 of the affidavit filed in support of the condone delay petition cannot be considered as sufficient cause for condoning the delay of 1815 days. Therefore, I do not find any reason to condone such enormous delay in filing the second appeal.

4. Accordingly, this CMP No4850 of 2026 is dismissed. Consequently, the second appeal in SA Sr No.56778 of 2025 is rejected at the SR stage itself.

There shall be no order as to costs.