Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
When delay occurs due to procedural lapses or administrative issues, courts may condone the delay if the applicant takes prompt steps upon realizing the oversight, but mere ignorance or delay in acting is not always accepted ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 60191"].
Analysis and Conclusion:
References:- ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 7157"]- ["2025 0 Supreme(AP) 602"]- ["2024 Supreme(Online)(NCLAT) 1130"]- ["2024 0 Supreme(Gau) 114"]- ["2026 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 261"]- ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 33661"]- ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 60191"]- ["2023 Supreme(Online)(NCLAT) 3002"]- ["2023 0 Supreme(Jhk) 460"]
In the intricate world of Indian litigation, time limits are strict, but courts often provide relief through . Many litigants wonder: Can I file after issuing notice to the respondent as I have not filed prior to the notice? This question arises frequently in , , and where deadlines are missed due to unavoidable circumstances.
This blog post breaks down the legal position, drawing from judicial precedents and practices. Note: This is general information based on case law and not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your case.
refers to a court's discretionary power to excuse a for filing an appeal, petition, or application beyond the prescribed under the (). Courts condone delay only if the applicant shows —a explanation demonstrating they were prevented by sufficient reasons from filing on time.
Key principles include:- Discretionary power: Courts exercise this judiciously, balancing justice with diligence. 2022 2 Supreme 211 2002 0 Supreme(SC) 2252- : Notice to the respondent is preferred, especially for significant delays, to allow opposition. 2022 2 Supreme 211- Bona fides: The applicant's conduct must be honest and diligent. 2015 4 Supreme 508
Yes, generally, you can file an application for even after issuing notice to the respondent. It is not mandatory to file it prior to or alongside the main application or appeal. Courts have consistently held this permissible, provided is established and the court is satisfied. 2022 2 Supreme 211 2002 0 Supreme(SC) 2252
The primary goal is to do substantial justice. Issuing notice before condonation ensures the respondent's right to be heard, aligning with . As noted in one judgment: The proviso to , it may be prudent to issue notice to the respondent before condoning the delay caused in filing the .2022 2 Supreme 211
Even post-notice filing is fine—the respondent can oppose at the hearing. Courts focus on:- Explanation for delay.- Applicant's conduct.- Prejudice to the respondent.
Example: In proceedings, delay was condoned after notice, emphasizing discretion and . 2002 0 Supreme(SC) 2252
, including the , have clarified this in various contexts:
Rules Context: Notice is prudent but not absolute; condonation can occur post-notice if cause is sufficient. Courts may condone initially but preserve respondent's opposition rights. 2022 2 Supreme 211 2011 7 Supreme 159 2002 0 Supreme(SC) 2252
(NI Act) Cases: Under , delays in cheque bounce can be condoned even if applications are filed after initial notices or stages in some instances. In one case, the issued notice on the condonation IA before , and higher courts remanded for consideration without faulting the sequence. 2021 0 Supreme(Kar) 218 The court held: Once the complaint came to be filed by the complainant along with for condoning the delay, before taking , issuing notice to the accused does not arise.2021 0 Supreme(Kar) 218
Another NI Act Ruling: must allow condonation opportunities, remanding if not done, regardless of notice timing. 2025 0 Supreme(Kar) 1381
: A 3107-day delay was not condoned due to insufficient cause, but notice on the application was deemed unnecessary when grounds were weak: Therefore no fruitful purpose will be served even by issuing notices to the respondents for calling objection on the application for ...2024 0 Supreme(All) 1431
Arbitration Matters: Delays under were condoned post-notice motions, showing flexibility. 2019 0 Supreme(Bom) 1402
Special Leave : Applications must specify delay days; even deficient ones were condoned in pandemic contexts after notices. 2026 Supreme(Online)(SC) 284
These cases illustrate that sequence (pre- or post-notice) is secondary to merit.
Condonation isn't automatic:- Inordinate unexplained delays: Refused despite notice. 2022 2 Supreme 211 2002 0 Supreme(SC) 2252- Lack of diligence: Mere excuses fail, e.g., 's plea without affidavit support. 2024 0 Supreme(All) 1431- Post- in NI Act: Some courts limit to pre-, but others allow. 2015 0 Supreme(P&H) 1010- No : Burden on applicant; COVID-era leniency applied exceptionally. 2026 Supreme(Online)(SC) 284
Courts may hear respondents post-notice but won't condone gross negligence.
To maximize success:1. File promptly with notice: Ideally, accompany main filing, then serve notice.2. Detail : Compute exact delay days, provide affidavits, documents. 2026 Supreme(Online)(SC) 2843. Demonstrate bona fides: Show due diligence, e.g., no .4. Prepare for opposition: Respondent can contest at hearing.5. Seek early hearing: For significant delays, request expedited consideration.
In Land Acquisition , states filed post-notice with delays condoned after hearings. 2016 0 Supreme(Ker) 348
Filing after issuing notice to the respondent is permissible under Indian law, supported by judicial discretion and principles. Courts prioritize over rigid timelines, as seen in precedents like 2022 2 Supreme 211 2002 0 Supreme(SC) 2252. However, success hinges on strong explanations and diligence.
Key Takeaways:- Yes, possible post-notice if cause suffices.- Notice ensures fairness—best practice.- Avoid negligence; unexplained delays fail.- Context matters: , NI Act, arbitration vary slightly.
For personalized guidance, consult a legal expert. Stay proactive in litigation to avoid such hurdles.
References:- 2022 2 Supreme 211, 2002 0 Supreme(SC) 2252, 2015 4 Supreme 508, 2026 Supreme(Online)(SC) 284, 2025 0 Supreme(Kar) 1381, 2024 0 Supreme(All) 1431, 2021 0 Supreme(Kar) 218, 2019 0 Supreme(Bom) 1402, 2015 0 Supreme(P&H) 1010, 2016 0 Supreme(Ker) 348
#CondonationOfDelay, #IndianLaw, #LegalProcedures
The said case ought to be filed within the stipulated time as per the provisions of Section 142 but the opposite party could not file the same within time, and the same was filed after a 12-day’s delay. ... Act, the complaint filed beyond the 30-day limitation is not maintainable unless a written application for condonation of delay under Section 142(b) is filed. 25. ... State of West Bengal & Anr,3 which clearly h....
He further contended that as defendant was set ex parte even before the Suit got transferred, question of issuing notice once again calling upon it to file written statement by the successor Court does not arise. ... In opinion of this Court, as in the present case even before transfer, the defendant was set ex parte, requirement of issuing any fresh notice does not arise. ... It is not in dispute that upon institution of Suit by plaintiff, the #HL....
In view of the aforesaid judgment, we are of the considered view that the Appellate Tribunal committed an error in issuing notice in an appeal that was filed by Respondent No.1 with delay of 388 days. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed. ... Learned Counsel for the Appellant in support of Delay Condonation Applications submits that Appellant being unaware of the Order, Appellant could not file and right to file ap....
No. 50390/2021 was filed seeking condonation of delay in the filing of the special leave petition. ... Hence, notice need not be served on the said respondent. Notice on the other respondents shall be served by all modes, including dasti. ... The Registry of this Court should, therefore, not undertake this exercise but insist upon the learned counsel for the applicant in the application for condonation of delay to....
The appellant was also unaware about any notice. The appellant was also unaware about the notices in the news paper as she never read the same and was also not informed by any one about the said notice including the respondent. ... Under these circumstances, it is not a fit case where the petition filed for condonation of delay can be allowed and there are no merits in the petition.” 18. ... It is quite reprehensible on the part of the Sub-Inspector ....
Section 142 (1)(b), matter is required to be remanded back to the Trial Court by affording an opportunity to file necessary application to seek condonation of delay. ... Legal notice was issued by the complainant to the accused informing him about dishonour of the cheque and calling upon him to repay the cheque amount. But, the legal notice was returned to the complainant as ‘addressee not found’. ... Even though the Hon’ble Apex Court in the above case has made it very clear that, it ....
over to the clerk of the counsel to file the same in registry but inadvertently could not be filed, when the counsel asked about the where about of the case only then it has come in the notice the file has been handed over to other client who's matter has been disposed off alongwith his file, thereafter ... Notice was issued in the application for condonation of delay. Office note indicates that dasti notices issued to private respo....
This appeal has been filed on the ground that the Appellant did not get any opportunity to oppose the condonation of delay since the notices were issued by the same order. 4. ... We allow three weeks’ time to file Reply Affidavit as well as application for condonation of delay. The Adjudicating Authority while considering Section 9 Application shall consider all the objections of the appeal including the application for condonation of del....
It appears from the order dated 25.04.2023 that while issuing notice upon the party to the proceeding, the appellant had also been directed to serve copy of delay condonation application as well as of Letters Patent Appeal upon the additional party. ... Accordingly, notice had been issued and in turn thereof, vakalatnama has been filed. 6. ... No.86 of 2021 on 05.01.2022 rejecting the delay condonation application since the appeal was filed....
Therefore no fruitful purpose will be served even by issuing notices to the respondents for calling objection on the application for condonation of delay, when this Court is satisfied that the grounds taken for condonation of delay of such a long period are not sufficient at all. ... Plea of Pardanashin lady was not taken in the affidavit filed in support of the application for condonation of delay but a plea has b....
According to my information, both the Courts below committed error in passing the orders. The trial Court not yet taken cognizance as per Section 142 of the N.I.Act. Once the complaint came to be filed by the complainant along with I.A. for condoning the delay, before taking cognizance, issuing notice to the accused does not arise. Here in this case, Section 142 (1) (b) application came to be filed by the complainant for condoning the delay.
This petition was filed after 90 days however within the extended period of 30 days as provided under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration Act. The petitioner appeared as the respondent in the said petition, and opposed the said notice of motion as filed by respondent No.1 as also opposed the Section 34 petition. However as the said petition was filed beyond the prescribed period of 90 days, a notice of motion was filed by respondent No.1 seeking condonation of delay. The petitioner contended that each of the foreign award(s) was a separate award and even assuming that Section ....
However, since I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and I am not inclined to grant leave, no useful purpose would be served in issuing notice on the said application seeking condonation of delay. 2. The leave to appeal is delayed by 26 days and, accordingly, the petitioner has filed an application to seek condonation of delay vide Crl MA No.10130/2016.
Pursuant to the said order notice was sent on 9.1.2013 with a hearing date of 30.1.2013. The State filed L.A.A. No. 820/2012 before this Court on 18.12.2012, with a delay of 87 days. The State filed L.A.A. No. 820/2012 before this Court 18.12.2012, with a delay of 87 days. On receipt of notice, the claimant entered appearance through lawyer, who filed vakalath on 1.2.1013. Pursuant to the said order notice was sent on 9.1.2013 with a hearing date of 30.1.2013. In C.M.Appl.No.1128/2012 filed for condonation of delay, notice to the respondent/claimant was ordered on 2.1.2013.....
However, it was made clear that the order of condonation of delay will not be extended to condone the delay with regard to other lapses, if any, more particularly, delay in issuing notice as contemplated under Section 142(b) of the Act. In the revision filed by the complainant Mukesh Sharma before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, order of learned Magistrate was reversed and it was held that delay of four days in filing the complaint stands condoned.
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
