9911796707
TMI BlogUnraveling the Principles of Delay Condonation: A Comprehensive Analysis by the Supreme CourtX X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the issue of delay in filing appeals. Arguments Presented The primary argument presented by the petitioners was that the delay in filing the appeal for the enhancement of compensation should be condoned, citing instances where the Supreme Court had previously condoned delays in similar situations. The petitioners relied on two specific cases: DHIRAJ SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES AND OTHERS VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS - 2014 (7) TMI 1303 - SUPREME COURT and IMRAT LAL VERSUS LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR - 2013 (11) TMI 1813 - SUPREME COURT , where delays were condoned, and compensation was enhanced, albeit with conditions. Discussions and Findings of the Court The court engaged in a comprehensive discussion of the princi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imilar matters does not entitle others to the same benefit if the court is not satisfied with the cause shown for the delay. 5. High Court's Discretion The court found no occasion to interfere with the High Court's exercise of discretion in refusing to condone the delay, citing reasons such as the claimants' negligence in pursuing the reference and filing the appeal, acceptance of the decision by most claimants, and the petitioners' failure to apply for procedural review. Analysis and Decision by the Court After a comprehensive analysis of the legal principles, the court concluded that it did not deem it proper and necessary to interfere with the High Court's decision refusing to condone the inordinate delay in filing th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e delays if sufficient cause is established, the court emphasized that this power is not absolute and may not be exercised in cases of inordinate delay, negligence, and lack of due diligence. The court rejected the petitioners' reliance on previous decisions where delays were condoned, stating that the facts and reasons for condonation in those cases were not identical or similar to the present case. The court found no occasion to interfere with the High Court's exercise of discretion in refusing to condone the delay, citing reasons such as the claimants' negligence in pursuing the reference and filing the appeal, acceptance of the decision by most claimants, and the petitioners' failure to apply for procedural review. Ultim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
