2013 (9) TMI 1063 - SC - Indian Laws

Whether in the present case, the High Court should have condoned the delay? Whether matter be remitted back to the High Court for disposal on merits?

Summary

Issues:
- Condonation of delay in filing D.B. Special Appeal Writ
- Jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution

Condonation of Delay:
The appeal in question pertains to the correctness of an order by the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court declining to condone the delay in filing a Special Appeal Writ. The delay of 98 days was reported by the office, with the appellant providing an explanation for the delay. The Division Bench noted an error in the appellant's statement regarding the filing date, leading to the conclusion that the delay had not been adequately explained. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed. The appellant argued that the delay of six days was insignificant and should not have led to the dismissal. The Supreme Court emphasized that condonation of delay should not be a matter of course but should lean towards advancing substantial justice unless there is gross negligence or lack of bonafides. Referring to previous judgments, the Court highlighted the need for a liberal approach in such matters. The Court found an apparent error in the dates mentioned in the condonation application, deeming it inadvertent and not sufficient to justify the dismissal. Therefore, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, condoned the delay, and remitted the matter back for disposal on merits without expressing an opinion on the case's substance.

Jurisdiction under Article 227:
The respondent argued that the Single Judge's order under challenge was passed under Article 227 of the Constitution, making the Special Appeal filed by the State not maintainable as per the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance 1949. The respondent contended that since the Single Judge's order was not subject to challenge in the present appeal, no interference was warranted. The Supreme Court clarified that the current appeal was solely concerned with the condonation of delay and not the merits of the dispute between the parties. The Court emphasized that the appeal's consideration was limited to the delay issue and not the underlying case's substance.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, condoned the delay, and remitted the matter for disposal on merits, emphasizing the need for a liberal approach in condoning delays to advance substantial justice.