It is axiomatic that condonation of delay is a matter of discretion of the Court. Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not say that such discretion can be exercised only if the delay is within a certain limit. Length of delay is no matter, acceptability of the explanation is the only criterion. Sometimes delay of the shortest range may be uncondonable due to a want of acceptable explanation whereas in certain other cases, delay of a very long range can be condoned as the explanation thereof is satisfactory. Once the Court accepts the explanation as sufficient, it is the result of positive exercise of discretion and normally the superior Court should not disturb such finding, much less in revisional jurisdiction, unless the exercise of discretion was on wholly untenable grounds or arbitrary or perverse.
Shakuntala Devi Jain Versus Kuntal Kumari and others – Civil Appeal against the judgment of Executing Court-05/09/1968
it frequently happens that in cases of execution proceedings, though there is a judgment, an order, that is, the formal expression of the decision is not drawn up. In such cases the concluding portion of the judgment which embodies the order may be treated as the order against which the appeal is preferred
This section raises two questions for consideration. First is, what is sufficient cause; and the second, what is the meaning of the clause “within such period”?
KEYWORDS:-Condonation of delay-delayed by 554 days-prolonged illness -Delay condoned DATE:- March 08, 2018 Act:–Section 5 of the Limitation Act SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Ummer Vs. Pottengal Subida & Ors. [Civil Appeal Nos. 2599-2600 […]