Telangana High Court: Barring People with over Two Children From Polls Violates No Fundamental Right  ||  Del HC Clarifies That Breach of Promise to Marry is Not The Same as False Promise Amounting To Rape  ||  Delhi High Court Rules Law Students Cannot be Barred From Exams For Not Meeting Minimum Attendance  ||  Delhi HC: Only a Sessions Court, Not an Ilaqa Magistrate, Can Order Further Probe After Committal  ||  Allahabad High Court: Protecting Homebuyers’ Interests is Paramount in Real Estate Insolvency  ||  Allahabad HC: Police Can Freeze Accounts on Suspicion; Affected Party May Seek Magistrate’s Relief  ||  NCLAT: Claimants Must Prove Asset Ownership; Liquidator Need Not Establish Title of Assets in Custody  ||  NCLAT: Director’s Resignation Doesn’t Release Personal Guarantor from Continuing Guarantee Liability  ||  NCLAT: Delay Condonable When Composite Appeal Filed in Time is Refiled after Registry’s Objection  ||  Supreme Court: Upper Floors Can be Converted for Commercial Use Only after Paying Conversion Charges    

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 2025 - All Rights Reserved