Lack Of Title Documents In Lal Dora Land Does Not Relieve Plaintiff From Proving Continuous Possession To Claim Ownership: Delhi High Court Unauthorized Video Recording Of Court Proceedings Without Prior Permission Amounts To Contempt Of Court: Bombay High Court Finality Of Litigation | State Cannot Re-Litigate Settled Decrees By Alleging Collusion After Affirmation Up To Supreme Court: Allahabad High Court SC/ST Act | Court Cannot Determine Conversion Status To Quash FIR Before Completion Of Investigation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Absence Of Manufacturing Activity And Dilapidated Condition Of Premises Constitute Valid Grounds For Closure: Bombay High Court Non-Disclosure Of Existing Insurance Policies In Proposal Form Entitles Insurer To Repudiate Claim: Calcutta High Court Will Interpretation | Bequest Of "Above Said Property" Includes Entire Estate, Not Just Descriptive Portions Mentioned Therein: Delhi High Court Limitation Act | Court Can Balance Equities By Denying Interest For Delay Period In Land Acquisition Appeals: Gujarat High Court Article 21 Constitution Of India | Personal Liberty Of Detenue Cannot Be Curtailed Without Authority Of Law Post-Acquittal: Jharkhand High Court Order 8 Rule 1A CPC | Trial Court Should Not Reject Documents Merely For Delay If Foundation Is Laid In Pleadings: Andhra Pradesh High Court Order XXII CPC Applies To SCC Suits; Rule 25 Of U.P. Urban Buildings Rules Does Not Govern Substitution Where Act Is Inapplicable: Allahabad High Court Recruitment Authorities Cannot Insist On Impossible Experience Criteria: Karnataka High Court Rules Against Rejection Of Motor Vehicle Inspector Candidates Order 38 Rule 8 CPC | Claim Petition Cannot Be Allowed Ex-Parte Without Adjudication On Merits: Kerala High Court Succession Certificate Under Section 372 Indian Succession Act Cannot Be Granted When Title Is Subject To Intricate Questions Of Fact And Law: Madras High Court SARFAESI Act | District Magistrate Cannot Adjudicate Disputes Between Borrower And Secured Creditor While Assisting Possession: Madhya Pradesh High Court Termination Based On Caste Status Without Cancellation Of Original Certificate Is Legally Unsustainable: Orissa High Court Section 13 Punjab Village Common Lands Act | Civil Court Jurisdiction Not Ousted In Private Injunction Suits Where Title Against Panchayat Is Not Sought: High Court Rights Of Persons With Disabilities Act  | Equal Opportunity Policy Of Employer Is Mandatory; Routine Transfer Policy Must Yield To Special Provisions For Caregivers: Rajasthan High Court Compensation Must Be Just, Not A Pittance: Punjab & Haryana High Court Enhances Award In Motor Accident Claim Registration Act | Sub-Registrar Has No Power To Adjudicate Title Or Refuse Registration Based On Unauthorized Layouts: Telangana High Court Section 50 NDPS Act | Failure To Individually Communicate Right To Be Searched Before Gazetted Officer Or Magistrate Vitiates Conviction: Telangana High Court

Explanation Given For Seeking Condonation of Huge Delay of 1,633 Days Cannot Be Accepted – Supreme Court on State’s Inefficiency

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court of India has dismissed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the State of U.P., citing the state’s failure to provide a valid justification for a delay of 1,633 days in challenging a High Court order.

The judgment revolved around the question of whether the condonation of a substantial delay in filing an SLP could be permitted based on the reasons provided by the state government.

The SLP aimed to overturn a decision from November 13, 2009, by the High Court. However, the petition was not filed until years later, in 2014. The state attributed the delay to administrative hurdles and legal misadvice, asserting that these factors impeded the timely filing of the petition.

Condonation of Delay: The justices criticized the state’s management of its legal affairs, noting that the presence of the state in the High Court hearings negated any claims of ignorance about the order. Justice Ravikumar highlighted, “The explanation given for seeking condonation of huge delay…cannot be accepted,” indicating that bureaucratic delays and mismanagement are unacceptable excuses.

Misrepresentation of Facts: The judgment also pointed out inaccuracies in the state’s representation of related legal precedents, which misled the court about the status of similar cases. This misrepresentation diminished the credibility of the state’s application for delay condonation.

Decision Concluding its findings, the Supreme Court dismissed the condonation of delay application, along with the SLP itself, firmly stating that inefficiencies and errors on the state’s part do not constitute “sufficient cause” under the law.

Date of Decision: May 3, 2024

State of U.P. & Another vs. Mohan Lal

Latest Legal News