The Single Judge allowed a petition to condone a 2066-day delay in filing a Second Appeal in a specific performance suit. The court held the reasons regarding age and health were justifiable, imposed costs, and directed numbering of the appeal.
Petition to condone delay allowed on payment of Rs. 15,000/- costs to be deposited within three weeks.
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.
C.M.P. No. 27750 of 2023
in S.A.SR.No.89445 of 2023
C.M.P. No. 27750 of 2023 in S.A.SR.No.89445 of 2023
T.V. THAMILSELVI, J.
This petition has been filed seeking to condone the delay of 2066 days in filing the above Second Appeal against the judgment and decree dated 06.02.2017 passed in A.S.No.25 of 2016, on the file of Principal District Judge, Krishnagiri reversing the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.235 of 2014 dated 29.04.2016 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Uthangarai.
C.M.P. No. 27750 of 2023 in S.A.SR.No.89445 of 2023
years, having suffered with age related health issues and also due to lack of communication, he was not able to come to Chennai and engage a counsel for filing the Second Appeal. Only during the first week of July 2023, he handed over papers to junior counsel, but after making it ready the appeal papers, by oversight he was not able to file the same within time and the second appeal was filed on 11.07.2023. However, there is a delay of 2066 days in filing the above second appeal arose, which is neither willful nor wanton. Therefore, he filed this petition to condone the delay in filing the above second appeal.
the respondents were served and they need some more time to file objections. But, the fact reveals that the suit was filed in the year of 2014 and due to the pendency of proceedings, the parties could not realise the fruits of the decree. . So, on considering the facts and circumstances and the reasons stated by the petitioner in the affidavit seems to be justifiable one and also considering the age of petitioners, who are senior citizens and now to avoid multiplicity of further proceedings, this court is inclined to allow this petition on condition that the petitioners shall pay a cost of
C.M.P. No. 27750 of 2023 in S.A.SR.No.89445 of 2023
Rs.15,000/- for the loss incurred to the plaintiff, payable to the credit of Suit
in O.S.No.235 of 2014 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Uthangarai within
a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Registry is directed to number the Second Appeal if it is otherwise found to be in order and post the matter on 07.01.2025.
02.12.2024
rpp
N.B. : Issue order copy on 03.12.2024
C.M.P. No. 27750 of 2023 in S.A.SR.No.89445 of 2023
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.
rpp
C.M.P.No. 27750 of 2023 in S.A.SR. No. 89445 of 2023
in
02.12.2024
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to condone a delay of 2066 days in filing a Second Appeal.
Whether the reasons for delay are justifiable in light of the petitioner's age and health.
T.V. Thamilselvi
1st Petitioner
Respondent/Plaintiff
T.V. Thamilselvi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
