Supreme Court: Foreign Judgment Unenforceable in India Without Fair Opportunity to Defend  ||  Supreme Court: High Court Cannot Decide Appeal Pending Before Statutory Authority Due to Delay  ||  Supreme Court: SDO Lacks Authority to Change Land Classification under UP Zamindari Abolition Act  ||  Supreme Court: Man Not Liable For Maintenance if DNA Test Proves He is Not the Child’s Father  ||  SC: Prison Must Not Dilute Rights of Disabled Inmates; Oversight Given to High-Powered Panel  ||  Delhi High Court: Judges Would Have to Recuse if Children as Central Govt Counsel is Treated as Bias  ||  Delhi HC: Fresh Tenders Allowed Despite Existing Contracts; Anticipatory Grievances Not Entertained  ||  Delhi High Court: Judges Cannot Respond Publicly; Criticism Must Be Responsible and Evidence-Based  ||  J&K&L High Court: IO Not Bound By FIR; Can Modify Offences in Final Chargesheet U/S 173 CrPC  ||  Supreme Court: Brief Service Breaks Do Not Bar Ad Hoc Employees From Regularisation    

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