Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers    |     Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court    |     Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case    |     Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case    |     Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute    |     Paternity Established Through SSC and Appointment Order, Legal Obligation to Maintain Unmarried Daughter: Andhra Pradesh High Court    |     No Appeal Shall Be Heard Without Disputed Tax Deposit: Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutionality of Section 96(b) of the Cantonment Act, 2006    |     Parties Must Choose Peace Over Litigation: Calcutta High Court Denies FIR Quashing in Family Dispute, Highlights Mediation Option    |     Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Recruitment of 1091 Assistant Professors and 67 Librarians In Punjab Due to Procedural Flaws    |     Res Judicata Bars Reconsideration of Adoption Validity in Second Round of Litigation: Jammu & Kashmir High Court    |     Candidates who use a party’s symbol must be deemed members of that party: Kerala High Court Upholds Disqualification for Defection    |     Inconsistencies in Eyewitness Accounts and Lack of Forensic Certainty Lead to Acquittal: Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case    |     Delhi High Court Quashes Reassessment Notices Under Section 148 Due to Invalid Sanction by JCIT    |     Summons Under PMLA for Further Investigation Does Not Infringe Right Against Self-Incrimination: Telangana HC    |     Termination During Probation Is Lawful if Concealment of Criminal Case Is Proven: Allahabad HC    |     Disproportionate Fine Cannot Be Imposed for Recovery of 1 Liter of Country-made Liquor: Patna High Court    |     Prosecution failed to prove identity of remains and establish murder beyond reasonable doubt: Orissa High Court Acquit Ex-Husband    |     Despite 12 Injuries on the Victim, No Intention to Kill Found: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 304 Part-II IPC    |     Governor’s sanction suffers from non-application of mind: Karnataka High Court Stays Governor’s Sanction for Investigation Against CM Siddaramaiah    |    

Kerala High Court Exemplifies Judicial Discretion in Delay Condonation”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal development, the Kerala High Court showcased the exercise of judicial discretion in condoning a delay of 25 days in filing a commercial appeal. The judgment, delivered by Justices ANIL K. NARENDRAN and SOPHY THOMAS on October 17, 2023, sets a notable precedent for cases involving delays in litigation.

The court began by acknowledging the delay and the appellant’s initial explanation for it, stating, “An application for condonation of delay should be drafted with careful concern and not in a haphazard manner harboring the notion that the courts are required to condone delay on the bedrock of the principle that adjudication of a lis on merits is seminal to justice dispensation system.”

The appellant, who was the defendant in a commercial suit, had initially faced skepticism regarding the reason given for the delay. However, the case took a pivotal turn when the appellant presented an additional affidavit along with evidence of his nine-month-old baby’s illness and other personal setbacks. The court observed, “The additional affidavit coupled with Annexure A1 discharge summary of a nine-month-old baby of the appellant during the relevant period, reasonably justifies the delay.”

The judgment exemplifies the delicate balance between adhering to the prescribed periods of limitation and the need to consider genuine reasons for delays. It underscores that while the purpose of the Commercial Courts Act is to ensure the speedy resolution of commercial disputes, a judicious application of discretion is essential.

To enforce accountability, the court imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000 on the appellant. The judgment serves as a reminder that delay condonation should not be taken lightly and should be backed by genuine justifications.

This ruling resonates with legal practitioners and stakeholders, emphasizing the importance of careful drafting in applications for delay condonation and the nuanced application of the law.

Date of Decision: 17 October 2023

MUHAMMEDSHAFEEK VS M/S. TASTY NUT INDUSTRIES,

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/15-Oct-2023-Mohamed-Vs-Tasty-Nuts-KerlHC.pdf"]

Similar News