Supreme Court: States Have Right to Levy Tax on Mineral Rights  ||  Kerala High Court: Publication of Justice Hema Commission Report, Stayed  ||  SC: Creditor Can Initiate CIRP Against CD Even After Completion of Same Against Corporate Guarantor  ||  Del. HC: Arbitral Award Gets Vitiated if Basic Contractual Framework Misunderstood  ||  Supreme Court: Promotion to be Effective from the Date on Which It Was Granted  ||  SC: Benchmark for Appointment in Law Enforcement Agency Should be Stringent  ||  SC: Rehabilitation of People Necessary before Evicting them for Development of Railway Station  ||  Supreme Court Dismisses Plea to Include Tribunals in National Judicial Data Grid  ||  Supreme Court: Petitioner Allowed to Convert Writ Petition into Special Leave Petition  ||  Ker. HC: Gain from Property Kept for Investment Purpose to be Taxed Under Capital Gains    

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 2024 - All Rights Reserved