BALBIR KAUR AND OTHERS VS SATISH KUMAR AND ANOTHER Present: Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Aayush Bansal, Advocate for the review-applicants/respondents.

* * * *

CM-24196-CII-2025

1. The present application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 read with Section 151 CPC is filed for condonation of delay of 80 days in filing the review application.

2. Learned counsel for the review applicants-respondents contends that the delay in filing the review application is procedural and not intentional, therefore, the same be condoned.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the review applicants- respondents and with his able assistance, carefully perused the whole file of this case.

4. Before examining the merits of the present application, it is pertinent to note the settled position that delay is not to be condoned as a matter of generosity or benevolence; the pursuit of substantial justice cannot come at the cost of prejudice to the opposite party.

5. It is well settled by catena of judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the law of limitation is not a mere technicality but has substantive value, being founded on public policy. The Limitation Act, 1963 seeks to ensure that litig