The High Court dismissed a petition to condone a 13-year delay in setting aside an ex parte order. The court rejected the sole explanation that counsel was unavailable as insufficient and for non-prosecution, deeming the delay inordinate.
Petition dismissed for non-prosecution; no further opportunity granted to condone delay.
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.
S.S. SUNDAR, J. and
C.M.P.No.2989 of 2022 in O.S.A.No.340 of 2008
C.M.P.No.2989 of 2022 in O.S.A.No.340 of 2008
A.A.NAKKIRAN, J.
[Order of the Court was made by S.S. SUNDAR, J. ]
This petition is filed to condone the delay of 4811 days in filing a petition to set aside the ex parte order passed in O.S.A.No.340 of 2008, dated 08.12.2008.
2.Despite the Original Side Appeal was disposed of by judgment
dated 08.12.2008, this petition is filed with a delay of 4811 days. Though the petition is filed with a delay of 13 years and more, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner represented that he has handed over papers for some one to file change of vakalat. The representation of the petitioner's counsel, after taking adjournment on the earlier occasion and to report now that he is no more the counsel for the petitioner, cannot be accepted as a valid reason. This Court, even earlier, observed that the reasons stated for condoning the inordinate and exorbitant delay of 13 years is not justified in view of the inadequate reasons stated in the
Page 1 of 3
C.M.P.No.2989 of 2022 in O.S.A.No.340 of 2008
affidavit. The petitioner cannot be given further opportunity.
S.S. SUNDAR, J. and A.A.NAKKIRAN, J.
mkn
3.In view of the fact that the counsel has not given any reason for reporting "no instructions" and since it is reported that the counsel has given intimation to the petitioner, this Court finds no reason to give further opportunity. Therefore, this petition is dismissed for nonprosecution.
4.Registry is directed to mark a copy of this order to the petitioner.
(S.S.S.R., J.) (A.A.N., J.) 21.12.2022
mkn
Page 2 of 3
C.M.P.No.2989 of 2022 in O.S.A.No.340 of 2008
C.M.P.No.2989 of 2022 in O.S.A.No.340 of 2008
Page 3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to condone a delay of 4811 days in filing a petition to set aside an ex parte order due to counsel's non-cooperation.
Whether to grant the petitioner further opportunity to explain the protracted delay for procedural irregularities.
S.S. SUNDAR
A.A. NAKKIRAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
