Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Condonation of Delay Not Filed or Considered - Many cases emphasize that if a delay condonation application is not filed or is filed without sufficient cause, the court cannot proceed to examine the merits of the case. The absence of a proper delay condonation application leads to dismissal of the review or appeal. ["P S GOSAINVSM/O DEFENCE - Central Administrative Tribunal"], ["2013 0 Supreme(Jhk) 5"], ["2024 0 Supreme(Jhk) 309"], ["2024 0 Supreme(Jhk) 442"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(Jhk) 4466"]
Order Rejection Due to Inordinate Delay - Courts have consistently rejected applications where delays are inordinate (ranging from about 1086 to 1224 days) without satisfactory or reasonable explanations. In such cases, the courts have held that condoning such delays is unjustified and cannot be done by imposing any conditions. ["2023 0 Supreme(Jhk) 1542"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(Jhk) 4466"]
Principle of Considering Limitation First - Courts hold that before examining the merits of a case, the primary step is to decide on the delay condonation application. If the delay is not condoned, the case is barred by limitation, and the court cannot proceed further. This approach aligns with the Supreme Court's stance in Kerala (1997), which underscores the necessity of considering delay before merit. ["2024 0 Supreme(Jhk) 309"], ["2024 0 Supreme(Jhk) 953"], ["2023 0 Supreme(Jhk) 1542"]
Application of Law and Judicial Discretion - The courts follow strict parameters for condoning delays, requiring sufficient, reasonable, and bona fide grounds. In the absence of such grounds, applications are rejected, and the case is dismissed on technical grounds of limitation, emphasizing that the right to be heard on merit is lost if the case is barred by delay. ["P S GOSAINVSM/O DEFENCE - Central Administrative Tribunal"], ["2013 0 Supreme(Jhk) 5"], ["2024 0 Supreme(Jhk) 309"]
Analysis and Conclusion:Courts have consistently held that without a proper application seeking condonation of delay, and in cases where delays are inordinate and unjustified, they cannot go on to examine the case on its merits. The principle is clear: delay must be reasonably explained and condoned before the substantive issues are addressed. Failure to do so results in dismissal, reinforcing that procedural timelines are integral to judicial process. This approach ensures adherence to legal limits and prevents abuse of the judicial process.
In the Indian judicial system, time is of the essence. Filing a case or appeal beyond the prescribed can bar your claim unless the court condones the delay. But a critical question arises: Without , can the court go on merit? The resounding answer from established precedents is generally no. Courts must first exercise their discretion to condone the delay before delving into the of the case. This principle upholds while balancing justice.
This blog post breaks down the legal position, drawing from and judgments. We'll explore the necessity of condonation, key principles like ',' exceptions, and practical recommendations. Note: This is general information based on case law and not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
refers to the court's power under , to excuse a litigant for filing late if they show '.' This cause must be adequate, reasonable, and prevent the party from approaching the court on time. As held in (supra), The law on the issue can be summarised to the effect that where a case has been presented in the court beyond limitation, the applicant has to explain the court as to what was the '''' which means an adequate and enough reason which prevented him to approach the court within limitation. 2018 0 Supreme(Bom) 1427
Without this step, courts typically lack to decide on merits. Proceedings remain procedural, often leading to dismissal. This is a but essential prerequisite. 2019 0 Supreme(Bom) 171 2018 0 Supreme(Bom) 1427
Courts adopt a justice-oriented, liberal, and pragmatic approach to condonation, yet it remains mandatory before merits. In Majji Sannemma v. Reddy Sridevi (), the court refused condonation due to unexplained delay post a specific period: There is no sufficient explanation for the period from till the Second Appeal was preferred in the year . 2025 0 Supreme(Bom) 618
Key reasons include:- : Ensures no automatic bypass of limitation laws. 2009 0 Supreme(Bom) 840 2022 0 Supreme(Bom) 606- Fairness to Opponents: Protects accrued due to delay. 2018 0 Supreme(Bom) 1427- Judicial Efficiency: Prevents frivolous delayed claims without justification.
Failure to condone means the case doesn't advance: Order rejecting application for and consequent dismissal of appeal would not amount to within meaning of 2019 0 Supreme(Bom) 1964
Multiple rulings affirm that merits adjudication follows condonation:
In , the emphasized: The terms '''' should be understood in their proper spirit, philosophy and purpose regard being had to the fact that these terms are basically elastic and are to be applied in proper perspective to the obtaining fact situation. 2018 0 Supreme(Bom) 1427
Other judgments reinforce this while highlighting nuances:
In a case, absence of condonation led to dismissal: It is also not in dispute that the present has not been filed within the prescribed limitation and no application seeking has been filed by the review applicants... Accordingly, the RA is dismissed.
A court quashed a rejection of delay condonation for non-consideration of grounds, remanding for merits post proper review: The matter is back to the to reconsider the delay condonation application on its own merit... 2023 0 Supreme(UK) 198
Government delays weren't condoned without : Delay of 528 days rejected as reasons like bulkiness weren't adequate. 2023 0 Supreme(Del) 3526
(e.g., 586 or 303 days) dismissed for lack of diligence: The explanation provided was not to condone the delay. 2023 0 Supreme(Jhk) 1340 2024 0 Supreme(Jhk) 256
must decide on merits post condonation for : When and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of deserves to be preferred. 2018 0 Supreme(J&K) 918 2018 0 Supreme(J&K) 258
These cases show courts first address delay applications, often without hearing merits prematurely.
While strict, exceptions exist:- Liberal Approach: For bona fide delays, courts condone to avoid injustice. 2021 0 Supreme(Bom) 1305- No Hearing Required Initially: Condonation can be decided in some cases. 2008 0 Supreme(Bom) 1793- /: Refusal justified, barring merits. 2018 0 Supreme(Bom) 1427
However, courts cannot skip condonation and jump to merits, as in execution cases where delay was inferred condoned before proceeding. 2015 0 Supreme(Cal) 729
To navigate this:1. File Promptly: Accompany delay applications with affidavits detailing '' – medical records, communication delays, etc.2. Anticipate Scrutiny: Explain entire delay period; gaps lead to rejection. 2025 0 Supreme(Bom) 6183. Seek Judicial Discretion Wisely: Highlight justice-oriented factors without negligence claims.4. Appeal Strategically: If rejected, challenge via revision/writ, but merits follow only post condonation.
Courts remind: Parties cannot assume merits without establishing valid delay cause. 2017 0 Supreme(AP) 244
Generally, without proper , courts cannot proceed to decide the merits of a case. This safeguards the judicial process, ensuring only justified delayed claims advance. Condonation invokes for substantive adjudication, promoting fairness. 2019 0 Supreme(Bom) 171 2018 0 Supreme(Bom) 1427 2009 0 Supreme(Bom) 840
Key Takeaways:- Condonation under Section 5 is prerequisite; merits follow only after. 2019 0 Supreme(Bom) 1964- Show '' with evidence for liberal consideration.- Inordinate/unexplained delays risk dismissal without merits review.- Aim for , but respect limitation's rigor.
For tailored advice, consult a legal expert. Stay informed on evolving precedents to strengthen your position.
References (select excerpts):1. on : 2018 0 Supreme(Bom) 14272. Prerequisite rulings: 2019 0 Supreme(Bom) 171 2009 0 Supreme(Bom) 8403. Additional cases:
2023 0 Supreme(UK) 198 #CondonationOfDelay, #LimitationAct, #CourtMerits
It is also not in dispute that the present Review Application has not been filed within the prescribed limitation and no application seeking condonation of delay has been filed by the review applicants. ... Accordingly, we find no merit in the review application. We also find that the review application barred by limitation. Accordingly, the RA is dismissed. ... AO, Gp °B', Gazetted Officer In Defence Accounts Department In ....
The matter is relegated back to the court of Record Officer to reconsider the delay condonation application on its own merit, and then pass a reasonable order, after considering the grounds already taken in the delay condonation application at the stage prior to the venturing to decide the revision under ... That in itself will amount to the fact, that the impugned order of rejecting the....
Therefore, taking into consideration abovementioned facts and circumstances, this Court does not find any merit in the instant application as the appellant has failed to satisfy this Court that there exists sufficient cause for delay in filing the instant appeal. ... If the merit of the defendant's RFA is not permitted to be examined by the appellate court, the State will have no opportu....
No.86 of 2021 on 05.01.2022 rejecting the delay condonation application since the appeal was filed after delay of about 687 days without any sufficient cause to condone the delay. 38. ... No court could be justified in condoning such an inordinate delay by imposing any condition whatsoever. The application is to be decided only within the parameters laid down by this #....
The coordinate Bench of this Court has passed an order in L.P.A. No.86 of 2021 on 05.01.2022 rejecting the delay condonation application since the appeal was filed after delay of about 687 days without any sufficient cause to condone the delay. 15. ... This Court, after taking into consideration the fact that the instant intra-court appeal has been fie....
This Court, after taking into consideration the fact that the instant intra-court appeal has been field after inordinate delay of 261 days, deems it fit and proper, to first consider the delay condonation application before going into the legality and propriety of the impugned order on merit. ... No.116 of 2020 on 18.07.2023 rejecting the delay condonation#HL_....
This Court, after taking into consideration the fact that the instant intra-court appeal has been field after inordinate delay of 303 days, deems it fit and proper, to first consider the delay condonation application before going into the legality and propriety of the impugned order on merit. ... The coordinate Bench of this Court has passed an order in L.P.A. No.86 of ....
This Court, after taking into consideration the fact that the instant intra-court appeal has been field after inordinate delay of 284 days, deems it fit and proper, to first consider the delay condonation application before going into the legality and propriety of the impugned order on merit. ... The coordinate Bench of this Court has passed an order in L.P.A. No.86 of ....
This Court, after taking into consideration the fact that the instant intra-court appeal has been field after inordinate delay of 1086 days, deems it fit and proper, to first consider the delay condonation application before going into the legality and propriety of the impugned order on merit. ... The coordinate Bench of this Court has passed an order in L.P.A. No.86 of....
The coordinate Bench of this Court has passed an order in L.P.A. No.86 of 2021 on 05.01.2022 rejecting the delay condonation application since the appeal was filed after delay of about 687 days without any sufficient cause to condone the delay. ... This Court, after taking into consideration the fact that the instant intra-court appeal has been filed....
Even on merits, by the impugned order the learned Single Judge has allowed the application for condonation of delay filed in the review petition. The learned Single Judge has considered the application for condonation of delay on merit after hearing both the parties. We do not perceive any illegality in the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge warranting any interference in the present intra-Court appeal.
In these circumstances, the appeal to have been decided on merit after condonation of delay. v. Though the application for condonation of delay has been dismissed, yet the State Commission has also held in one sentence that the appeal was meritless. The aforesaid course is not sustainable and the order impugned is, therefore, liable to be quashed. The shop of the petitioner was admittedly insured and the same was gutted in fire and the goods insured were destroyed, however, t....
The aforesaid course is not sustainable and the order impugned is, therefore, liable to be quashed. v. Though the application for condonation of delay has been dismissed, yet the State Commission has also held in one sentence that the appeal was merit-less. The shop of the petitioner was admittedly insured and the same was gutted in fire and the goods insured were destroyed, however, the amount of full compensation was not paid. In these circumstances, the appeal to have been decided....
In Barla Prabhakar Reddy v. Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District 2009 (2) ALD 681 this Court, having noted that the Joint Collector did not advert to either grounds urged in support of the request for condonation of delay or the grounds urged by the opposite party against the request for condonation of delay and that the record also does not disclose that there exists any separate order condoning the delay, held that there is a serious infirmity in the order passed by the Joint Collector. #HL....
7. Here the learned Court below has considered the ‘Police help’ application beyond the prescribed period enshrined under Order 21, Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Then it should be inferred that the learned Court below proceeded to decide the matter on merit and condonation of delay was made. It shocks my conscience to say that even after getting a decree, the decree holder has been waiting for more than nine years to enjoy the fruits of the decree.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
