2006 (8) TMI 544 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Delay in filing an appeal before the Tribunal by the State, application for condonation of delay, legal position regarding State as a litigant, peculiar working of the State functioning in condonation of delay, comparison of State with private litigants in terms of limitation.

Analysis:
The writ petition was filed against the order of the Haryana Tax Tribunal, which condoned the delay in filing an appeal by the State. The State relied on a judgment of the Supreme Court emphasizing a pragmatic approach in considering "sufficient cause" for delays. The Court highlighted that unless there is an intention to delay the matter, delays should normally be condoned. The petitioner cited judgments from the Orissa High Court to support the argument that the State should be treated at par with private litigants concerning limitation issues.

The Court acknowledged the legal position that the State is equivalent to a private person regarding limitation issues. However, it also recognized that the peculiar working of the State's functioning cannot be disregarded when deciding on the condonation of delay in appeals filed by the State. Referring to a recent Supreme Court decision, the Court reiterated the need for a pragmatic approach in justice-oriented processes, especially when dealing with delays caused by the slow pace and encumbered process of governmental decision-making.

Based on the law laid down by the Supreme Court, the Court found no illegality in the Tribunal's decision to condone the delay in the State's appeal filing. The Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Tribunal's decision to condone the delay in filing the appeal by the State.