Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Order IX Rule 7 – Application filed after delay of 14 years – Limitation Act, 1963, s. 5 – Condonation of delay is discretionary power of the court – Power to be exercised judiciously – Not in cases of gross negligence on part of litigant – 14 years delay cannot be condoned – ‘Sufficient cause’ not shown – Gross negligence on part of appellant in pursuing the matter.
Held: Appellant took 14 years to challenge an order of Trial Court to proceed ex parte against him – No satisfactory explanation for delay in filing application under Order IX Rule 7, CPC – Appellant grossly negligent in pursuing the matter before the Trial Court – Trial Court, revisional court and the High Court correct in dismissing claim – ‘Sufficient cause’ not defined in s. 5, Limitation Act – Has to be construed liberally and in order to meet ends of justice – Deserving and meritorious cases should not be dismissed solely on the ground of delay – Discretionary power of a court to condone delay must be exercised judiciously – Delay due to gross negligence and/or want of due diligence on the part of the litigant not to be condoned – ‘Sufficient cause’ can be given liberal construction when no negligence, nor inaction, nor want of bona fide is imputable to the litigant [Paras 9, 10]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.