Supreme Court Holds Allottees Who Elected RERA Remedy Cannot Subsequently Seek Interim Relief Under Section 9 Arbitration Act Lodging FIR Does Not Amount To Instigation: Supreme Court Quashes Section 306 IPC Case Against In-Laws Over Husband's Suicide Vigilant Citizen Deserves Acknowledgment: Supreme Court Sets Strict Timelines For 20-Year-Old Subway Project, Lauds Litigant's Relentless Legal Battle Lawyer Cannot Disclose Privileged Information On TV Even If Client Becomes Adversary: Supreme Court Upholds Suspension Of Advocate Rizwan Siddique, Slaps ₹5 Lakh Cost On Both Parties Supreme Court Modifies 3-Year Bar Practice Rule; Orders 1-Year Practice Coupled With 2-Year Academy Training & Clerkship Model Made A Scapegoat Under Pressure Of Public Outcry: Delhi High Court Acquits Man Sentenced To Life In POCSO Case Doctrine Of Lis Pendens Applies To Court Auctions; Purchaser Bound By Outcome Of Pending Specific Performance Suit: Allahabad High Court Andhra Pradesh High Court Rules Section 65B Evidence Act Objection Cannot Be Raised For First Time In Appeal Two-Month Time Limit To File Evidence Under Rule 45 Of Trade Marks Rules 2017 Is Mandatory; Non-Compliance Results In Deemed Abandonment: Madras High Court SEBI Act | Special Law Overrides General Law': Bombay High Court Quashes Police FIR Against Ex-Axis Mutual Fund Chief Dealer In Front-Running Case 'Truth Cannot Be Sacrificed At The Altar Of Rigid Timelines': Calcutta High Court Upholds Section 311 CrPC Powers At Any Stage For Just Decision 'A Dispute Does Not Cease To Be Criminal Merely Because It Involves Commercial Transaction': Chhattisgarh High Court Refuses To Quash Cheating FIR In ₹4.39 Cr Land Deal Holding In Designated Centres Only Way If Foreigner Cannot Be Expelled: Gauhati High Court Denies Bail To Declared Foreigner Who Illegally Re-Entered India Madras High Court Issues Guidelines Against Police Harassment Under Guise Of Enquiry, Mandates Written Summons Under Section 179 BNSS Grave Ramifications On Rights': Punjab & Haryana High Court Mandates Strict Compliance Of Section 82 CrPC Before Declaring Accused As Proclaimed Person 'Interacting With Father Benefits Child's Well-Being': Kerala High Court Grants Virtual Access To Father After Mother Takes Child Abroad Violating Restraint Order Agreement In Family Member’s Name Cannot Shield Occupants Under Section 53-A TP Act': Uttarakhand High Court Upholds Eviction Of Licensees Not Filling A Lacuna: Subsequent Forensic Report From Criminal Case Can Be Produced As Additional Evidence In Civil Suit: Punjab & Haryana High Court Mere Nomination In FIR Not Enough For Vicarious Liability: Allahabad High Court Acquits Murder Accused Under Section 149 IPC Demanding Separations From Depending In-Laws Constitute Mental Cruelty: Calcutta High Court Upholds Divorce Human Memory Not Photographic: Allahabad High Court Upholds Murder Conviction, Reiterates 'Falsus In Uno' Maxim Has No Application In India Litigant Claiming To Be Sub-Tenant Before Revenue Authorities Cannot Set Up Plea Of Adverse Possession In Civil Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court Civil Death": Orissa High Court Rules Blacklisting Of Contractor Without Specific Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice Delay Irrespective Of Number Of Years Ought To Be Condoned In Land Acquisition Matters': Punjab & Haryana High Court Condones 3953 Days Delay 'Notary Cannot Act As Marriage Officer': Madhya Pradesh High Court Accepts Notary's Apology With ₹2 Lakh Welfare Cost, Directs Display Board Against Notarizing Marriages

Entertaining an Application Filed at the Behest of a Stranger Is Totally Unsustainable in Law – Supreme Court Quashes Orders on Condonation of Delay Filed by Non-Party

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling on procedural improprieties, the Supreme Court of India today overturned decisions by both a trial court and the High Court, which had previously condoned an extensive delay in a restoration application filed by a non-party, P & S Nirman Pvt. Ltd. The apex court held that such condonation is “totally unsustainable in law.”

Legal Point: The core issue revolved around the legal standing and appropriateness of allowing a non-party to the original proceedings to seek condonation of delay. The Supreme Court emphatically clarified that proceedings should not entertain applications from those not originally involved in the suit, as it “could lead to misuse by unrelated parties intervening in judicial processes.”

Facts and Issues: The appeal stemmed from a disputed decision where a non-party, claiming rights based on an unregistered agreement with the legal heirs of the original plaintiff, was allowed by the trial court and upheld by the High Court to restore a dismissed suit concerning land acquisition. This suit had been dismissed for lack of prosecution back in 2011. The non-party, P & S Nirman Pvt. Ltd., had not been part of the original proceedings but sought restoration nearly ten years later, asserting interests acquired through an agreement made in 2009.

Legitimacy of Non-Party Applications: The Supreme Court criticized the lower courts’ decisions to entertain and approve applications from non-parties, asserting, “If the approach as adopted by the trial court is approved, any Tom, Dick and Harry would be permitted to move an application for condonation of delay in filing an application for restoration of the suit even if he is not a party to the subject suit.”

Judicial Integrity: Justice B.R. Gavai, in his judgment, emphasized that accepting such applications undermines the integrity and proper administration of the law, necessitating adherence to established legal principles centered around party-based litigation.

Pending Applications by Actual Parties: The Court noted that the application for condonation of delay filed by the actual parties (legal heirs of the original plaintiff) in 2019 was still pending, questioning the necessity and propriety of considering a subsequent application by a non-party.

Decision: The Supreme Court quashed the judgments of the High Court and the trial court, setting aside their orders that allowed the condonation of delay and the restoration of the suit filed by the non-party. The case was remanded back to the trial court to consider the pending application by the original plaintiff’s legal heirs on its own merits, explicitly instructing that this should occur without the influence of non-parties.

Date of Decision: May 8, 2024

Vijay Laxman Bhawe Since Deceased Through His Legal Heirs v. P & S Nirman Pvt. Ltd. And Others

Latest Legal News