SC: Bribe Recovery Alone Cannot Prove Guilt without Proof of Demand under PC Act  ||  SC: Cut Power, Water to Bulk Waste Generators Violating Solid Waste Rules  ||  SC: RPF Employee Who Conceals Criminal Case Can be Discharged at Any Stage  ||  SC: Police can Register FIR Despite Magistrate Rejecting S.156(3) CrPC Application  ||  SC: Criminal Acquittal Alone Cannot Prove Absence of Negligence in Accident Claims  ||  SC: Referral Fees Earned By Auto Dealers for Bank, Insurance Promotion Taxable as Service Tax  ||  Supreme Court Revisits the definition of “Industry”: 9-Judge Bench Reformulates the 1978 Triple Test  ||  Delhi HC: Exam Integrity is a Shared Duty of Candidates and Authorities  ||  Delhi High Court: POCSO Allows Child Witness Cross-Examination but Bars Aggressive Questioning  ||  Kerala HC: Christian Women May File Divorce Pleas Where They Reside    

Vijay Laxman Bhawe since deceased through his Legal Heirs Vs. P & S Nirman Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 394) - (Supreme Court) (08 May 2024)

Entertaining an application filed at the behest of a stranger for condonation of delay is unsustainable in law

MANU/SC/0406/2024

Property

The present appeal challenges the judgment passed by the High Court, whereby the High Court dismissed the revision application filed by the Appellants, challenging the order passed by the trial court in Application, filed by Respondent No. 1 herein, for condonation of delay.

The approach of the trial court in entertaining the application filed at the behest of Respondent No. 1 is totally unsustainable in law. The claim of Respondent No. 1 is on an unregistered Agreement for Sale dated 8th December 2009. Entertaining an application filed at the behest of a stranger for condonation of delay in filing an application for restoration of the subject suit is totally unsustainable in law. Admittedly, Respondent No. 1 has not even been impleaded in the subject suit. As such, the application filed at the behest of the stranger, who is not a party to the proceedings, is totally illegal. If the approach as adopted by the trial court is approved, any Tom, Dick and Harry would be permitted to move an application for condonation of delay in filing an application for restoration of the suit even if he is not a party to the subject suit.

The reasoning given by the trial court as well as the High Court for condoning such an inordinate delay will not come under the ambit of "sufficient cause" as has been delineated by this Court in a catena of judgments. The orders of the trial court as well as the High Court are not sustainable in law. The judgment passed by the High Court and the order passed by the trial court are quashed and set aside. Appeal allowed.

Tags : DELAY   CONDONATION   LEGALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved