Special Appeal Maintainable If Single Judge's Order Relates To Authority Acting Without Statutory Appellate Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court Recall Of Witness For Cross-Examination Permissible On Newly Framed Issue Post-Remand Even If Disposal Timeline Is Fixed: Karnataka High Court Litigant Cannot Overcome Law Of Limitation By Shifting Blame On Counsel Through Inconsistent Stands: Madras High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Preventive Detention Not Warranted If Person Can Be Dealt With Under Ordinary Laws; No Effort To Arrest In Pending Cases: Supreme Court Writ Petition Cannot Be Dismissed On ‘Forum Non Conveniens’ If Respondent's Office Is Within Court's Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Supreme Court Doubts 'Sajjan Singh' Ruling; Refers To Larger Bench Whether Third Judge Can Re-examine Unanimous Findings Under Section 392 CrPC SARFAESI Sale Vitiated If Balance 75% Bid Amount Is Paid Beyond 15 Days Without Written Extension Agreement: Supreme Court Delhi High Court Can't Refuse Writ Petition Against BSF Dismissal Merely Because Cause Of Action Arose Outside Delhi: Supreme Court Private Rights Must Yield To Public Interest: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs Removal Of Encroachments On Public Road Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Re-Agitate Factual Disputes Or Seek Re-Hearing On Merits: Allahabad High Court Recovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act Vitiated If Police Already Present At Spot Before Arrival Of Panch Witnesses: Bombay High Court Mere Non-Compliance Or Delay In Procedure Under Section 52A NDPS Act Is An Irregularity, Not An Illegality Entitling Accused To Bail: Calcutta High Court Recovery Of Weapon Used In Commission Of Offence Not A Sine Qua Non For Conviction If Ocular Evidence Is Corroborated: Allahabad High Court Seized Vehicles Shouldn't Be Kept Idle To Rot In Police Stations, Utility Vanishes Due To Stagnation: Karnataka High Court Or 39 CPC | Trial Court Erred In Dismissing Injunction Application Despite Respondent's 'No Objection' To Restraining Share Transfer: Gauhati High Court Issuing NBW Merely For Absence Of Accused Already On Bail Is Improper; Liberty Cannot Be Dealt With Lightly: Orissa High Court 138 NI | Expert Examination Of Disputed Documents Essential For Just Adjudication If Complainant Denies Handwriting & Signatures: Rajasthan High Court Order 41 Rule 27 CPC Cannot Be Invoked To Fill Lacunae In Evidence If Party Voluntarily Closed Evidence In Trial Court: Delhi High Court

Liberal and Justice-Oriented Approach Required in Condonation of Delay: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India reiterated the importance of adopting a "liberal and justice-oriented approach" when considering applications for the condonation of delay. The ruling, delivered on October 9, 2023, emphasized the need to balance technical considerations with the broader goal of achieving substantial justice.

The judgment, authored by Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Dipankar Datta, cited various precedents and discussed the principles governing the condonation of delay, particularly in cases involving the government as a party.

The Court acknowledged that the power to condone delay is a discretionary one and should depend on the sufficiency of the cause presented and the acceptability of the explanation offered. The length of the delay was considered immaterial, and the Court made a clear distinction between an "explanation" and an "excuse."

The judgment highlighted the challenges faced by the government in presenting appeals within the prescribed period of limitation due to the impersonal nature of its functioning and the bureaucratic process involved in decision-making. It underscored the need to avoid nit-picking individual defaults at the expense of collective interests and public justice.

Justice Trivedi and Justice Datta's ruling also noted that while the law of limitation is based on public policy, a mere lapse on the part of a litigant should not automatically lead to the denial of condonation of delay, as this could result in a miscarriage of justice.

The Court ultimately upheld the High Court's exercise of discretion in favor of condoning the delay in the case before them, emphasizing that the High Court had considered various factors, including the elastic nature of "sufficient cause" and the explanations provided for the delay. The judgment concluded that there was no clear error in the High Court's decision.

This judgment serves as a reminder of the courts' commitment to ensuring that substantive rights of both private parties and the state are not thwarted by technicalities, provided that sufficient cause is demonstrated. It reaffirms the importance of a balanced and pragmatic approach to the condonation of delay, particularly when public interest is at stake.

The ruling, which draws from a rich tapestry of legal precedents, sends a clear message that the courts will continue to prioritize justice and fairness in their decisions, even in cases involving governmental entities.

 Date of Decision: 9th October 2023

SHEO RAJ SINGH (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS. & ORS. vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR.  

                                              

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/09-Oct-2023-SHEO-RAJ-SINGH-Vs-UOI.pdf"]

Latest Legal News