In a significant judgment by the Gujarat High Court, a delay of 104 days in filing the First Appeal was condoned. The application for condonation of delay was allowed, emphasizing the importance of substantial justice. The case highlights the flexible application of law to serve the ends of justice, ensuring that litigants are not penalized for delays but rather heard on the merits of their case. Stay tuned for more updates on this landmark decision!
Facts
- The present application has been filed for condonation of delay of 104 days in filing the First Appeal.
- The delay was due to reasons explained in the application.
- The Court will consider whether the delay should be condoned based on the reasons provided.
Arguments
- Applicant as owner learned about judgment and award after receiving notice of Execution Petition No. 11 of 2024.
- Insurance company was defending the matter on behalf of the applicant.
- Provisions were made for mandatory deposit of the statutory amount before filing the appeal.
- Appeal was preferred, resulting in a delay of 104 days.
Analysis
- The power to condone delay is conferred by Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act of 1963 to enable Courts to do substantial justice by disposing of matters on merits.
- The expression ‘sufficient cause’ in Section 5 is flexible and allows courts to apply the law in a manner that serves the ends of justice.
- A liberal approach is adopted in condoning delay as it is understood that a litigant usually does not benefit from lodging an appeal late.
- Refusal to condone delay can lead to the dismissal of a meritorious matter at the very beginning, thereby defeating the cause of justice.
- Despite the liberal approach of the Court, other courts in the hierarchy do not seem to have adopted the same mentality regarding delays.
- The highest consequence of condoning delays is a decision based on merits after hearing the parties.
- Delays in legal processes must be explained, but a rational, common-sense approach should be taken.
- The judiciary is respected for its ability to remove injustice, not legalize it on technical grounds.
- A litigant does not benefit from resorting to delays and risks facing consequences for doing so.
- Substantial justice should be prioritized over technical considerations when applicable.
- Delays are not presumed to be deliberate or made in bad faith.
Decision
- Delay of 104 days in filing the First Appeal is condoned.
- Application is allowed.
- First Appeal to be listed on 09.05.2024.
Case Title: DAMJIBHAI HANSRAJBHAI GAMTHA Vs. MINOR PRABHU KIRITBHAI DANGI THROUGH KIRITBHAI NARVATBHAI DANGI
Case Number: R/CA/2435/2024
