The Gauhati High Court allowed an application for condonation of a 218-day delay in filing an appeal. The court held that the petitioners' ailment satisfactorily explained the delay, negating any negligence on their part.
Delay of 218 days in preferring the appeal is condoned; the impugned application is allowed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010103362018
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil) 1698/2018
1:ARJUN KUMAR
S/O LATE KANTI RAM KUMAR, R/O GOTANAGAR, GUWAHATI-33, P.S. JALUKBARI, IN THE DIST. OF KAMRUP (M), ASSAM.
VERSUS
1:SMTI GAYATRI KUMARI
W/O LATE GAJEN RAM KUMAR @ GAJEN KUMAR, R/O GOTANAGAR, HOUSE NO. , P.S. JALUKBARI, GUWAHATI-33 IN THE DIST. OF KAMRUP (M), ASSAM.
2:SHRI BRAJEN KUMAR S/O LATE GAJEN RAM KUMAR @ GAJEN KUMAR R/O GOTANAGAR HOUSE NO. P.S. JALUKBARI GUWAHATI-33 IN THE DIST. OF KAMRUP (M) ASSAM.
3:SHRI RAJEN KUMAR SON OF LATE GAJEN RAM KUMAR @ GAJEN KUMAR R/O GOTANAGAR HOUSE NO. P.S. JALUKBARI GUWAHATI-33 IN THE DIST. OF KAMRUP (M) ASSAM.
4:SMTI BINITA KUMAR D/O LATE GAJEN RAM KUMAR @ GAJEN KUMAR R/O GOTANAGAR HOUSE NO. P.S. JALUKBARI GUWAHATI-33 IN THE DIST. OF KAMRUP (M) ASSAM
Page No.# 2/2
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A K DAS
Advocate for the Respondent : MR A UPADHYAY (R2-4)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIR ALFAZ ALI
ORDER
Date : 11-02-2019
Heard Mr. A.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the respondent.
By this application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, the petitioner has prayed for condonation of 218 days in preferring the appeal.
The prayer of the petitioner for condonation of delay has been objected to by the learned counsel for the respondent and an affidavit-in-opposition has also been filed to that effect. The petitioner has also filed a rejoinder to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent pursuant to the order of this Court.
The basic ground for condonation of delay is that the petitioner has been suffering from ailment and he has to undergo treatment because of which, the appeal could not be filed within the statutory period.
Having heard the learned counsel for both the sides and the cause of delay explained in the petition, supported by affidavit and also the medical document, I am of the view, that the delay of 218 days has been explained satisfactorily, inasmuch as, there is nothing to attribute negligence on the part of the petitioner/appellant in not filing the appeal within time. Thus, having considered the cause shown for the delay, the petition is allowed and the delay stands condoned.
I.A. stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the delay of 218 days in filing the appeal can be condoned due to the petitioner's ailment.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Arjun Kumar
Smti Gayatri Kumari
Shri Brajen Kumar
Shri Rajen Kumar
Smti Binita Kumar
Mir Alfaz Ali
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
