The Supreme Court has recently issued a significant ruling regarding the condonation of delay in filing appeals.
The bench of Justice J. B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan has emphasized that a litigant seeking to condone delay must provide a cogent explanation for why the appeal was not filed from the very first day within the limitation period.
“We cannot simply brush aside the delay that occurred in preferring the second appeal, due to callous and lackadaisical attitude on the part of the officials functioning in the State machinery. Though the Government adopts systematic approach in handling the legal issues and preferring the petitions/applications/appeals well within the time, due to the fault on the part of the officials in merely communicating the information on time, huge revenue loss will be caused to the Government exchequer,” the bench said.
The Special Leave Petition is filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh against the judgment dated 24.01.2024 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in Second Appeal, by which, the High Court dismissed the appeal on the ground that it was filed with inordinate delay of 5 years 10 months and 16 days and no satisfactory reason was adduced for the same.
The state submitted that the delay caused in filing the second appeal was well explained by the State and the same was not intentional. However, the High Court erroneously dismissed the second appeal on the ground of delay, without considering the merits of the case, wherein, valuable Government lands measuring a total extent of 1,300 Hectare situated at Village Majhganwa, Tehsil and District Katni, were involved.
Though the trial Court passed the well-reasoned judgment dismissing the suit filed by the respondent, the first Appellate Court reversed the same and allowed the appeal in favour of the respondent, thereby affecting the right of the petitioner in respect of the lands.
There was enormous delay at every stage i.e., from the date of receipt of the judgment passed by the First Appellate Court to till the date of filing the second appeal by the State. The judgement was passed by the First Appellate Court on 21.08.2014 and the same was communicated by the Government Advocate representing the State to the Collector, only on 25.08.2015 i.e., after a delay of one year. Causing 3 months’ delay, by letter dated 10.12.2015, the Collector informed the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, about the passing of the judgment against the State and preferring a second appeal against the same.
The Law Department took three years’ time and gave permission for filing an appeal on 26.10.2018, which was sent to the Collector on 31.10.2018. Based on the said opinion, after preparation of the appeal papers, the State filed the second appeal only on 18.10.2019.
The legal position is that where a case has been presented in the Court beyond limitation, the petitioner has to explain the Court as to what was the “sufficient cause” which means an adequate and enough reason which prevented him to approach the Court within limitation.
The court dismissed the Special Leave Petition with costs of Rs.1,00,000 to be deposited by the State within a period of two weeks with the Supreme Court Mediation Centre and file proof. If the said amount, as directed, is not deposited by the State, the Registry shall take necessary steps for recovery of the same, in accordance with law.
Read More: Top 100 GST Judgments Of 2024 – PART – 1
Case Details
Case Title: State of Madhya Pradesh Versus Ramkumar Choudhary
Case No.: Special Leave Petition (C) Diary No. 48636 Of 2024
Date: 29/11/2024
Counsel For Petitioner: Harmeet Singh Ruprah, learned Deputy Advocate General
