Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. Sathish Kumar, M. Jothiraman, JJ
State of Tamil Nadu – Appellant
Versus
Anbalagan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. failure to provide satisfactory justification for significant filing delays leads to dismissal. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. condonation of delay requires sufficient cause and is not a matter of right. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
PRAYER in C.M.P.(MD)No.6103 of 2026:- Miscellaneous Petition – filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, to condone the delay of 867 days in filing the above writ appeal.
PRAYER in W.A.(MD)No.SR 36730 of 2026:- Writ Appeal – filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, to set aside the order dated 06.11.2023 passed in W.P.(MD)No.19330 of 2023 and allow the writ petition.
For Appellants : Mr.S.Venkatesh Counsel for the State
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.)
This petition is filed seeking to condone the delay of 867 days in filing the writ appeal.
2.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.
3.The reason assigned for the delay is that the paper got mixed up with other bundles and got misplaced. Except the above, no other reasons have been assigned.
4.Ordinarily, the Court adopts a liberal approach while considering petitions for condonation of delay. At the same time, for
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
