What is the Condonation of Delay application and when it is filed before any Court of Law or Tribunal or Regulatory Authorities?[1]
Introduction
“Condonation of Delay” as the name suggests is a pardon plea. It is an application drafted to condone the delay in filing any Petition/ Complaint/ Written Statement/Appeal etc. before the relevant Court(s)/ Tribunal(s)/ Authorities as per the statutory obligation cast by the different Acts passed by the legislature. The same shall be understood by way of a hypothetical example in particular circumstances and the same may vary according to the facts and circumstances of each and every case and the relevant Acts involved.
Hypothetical example
Presume that Mr A from ZYZ private limited is aggrieved by the Order delivered by the State Commission situated in any State and wants to file an appeal against the order of the State Commission before the National Consumer Redressal Commission. However, to file an appeal before the National Consumer Redressal Commission there is a statutory limitation under the relevant Act. However, Mr A has exceeded a statutory number of days to file the Appeal against the order passed by the State Commission. In the given situation what is the resource that Mr A can avail himself of? Mr A may consider filing the Condonation of delay application along with the Appeal. In the said Application the grounds should be explained by Mr A. while the explanation of the grounds Mr A has to explain the sufficient cause. Now let’s analyze the term “sufficient cause”.
Rule
The said section reproduced shall be read with the Act invoked along with the Limitation Act.
Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963
Extension of prescribed period in certain cases– any appeal or any application, other than an application under any of the provisions of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, may be admitted after the prescribed period if the appellant or the applicant satisfies the court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal or making the application within such period.
Explanation. –The fact that the appellant or the applicant was misled by any order, practice, or judgment of the High Court in ascertaining or computing the prescribed period may be sufficient cause within the meaning of this section.
Analysis
The term “sufficient cause’ has been explained by various judgments delivered by various Court(s). However, for this example, I have mentioned only two judgments that are relevant to the facts and circumstances.
The Hon’ble Apex Court in Baswaraj and Ors Vs. the Spl Land Acquisition officer AIR 2014 SC 746. The relevant para is reproduced hereinbelow: –
Sufficient cause is the cause for which Defendant could not be blamed for his absence. The meaning of the word “sufficient” is “adequate” or “enough”, inasmuch as may be necessary to answer the purpose intended. Therefore, the word “sufficient” embraces no more than that which provides a platitude, which when the act done suffices to accomplish the purpose intended in the facts and circumstances existing in a case, duly examined from the viewpoint of a reasonable standard of a cautious man. In this context,” sufficient cause” means that the party should not have acted in a negligent manner or there was a want of bona fide on its part in view of the facts and circumstances of a case or it cannot be alleged that the party has “not acted diligently” or “remained inactive”. However, the facts and circumstances of each case must afford sufficient ground to enable the Court concerned to exercise discretion for the reason that whenever the Court exercises discretion, it has to be exercised judiciously. The applicant must satisfy the Court that he was prevented by any “sufficient cause” from prosecuting his case, and unless a satisfactory explanation is furnished, the Court should not allow the application for condonation of delay. The court has to examine whether the mistake is bona fide or was merely a device to cover an ulterior purpose.
Another judgment titled Anil Kumar Sharma Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd and Ors reported at IV (20150 CPJ 453 (NC). The para is reproduced hereinbelow: –
12 …… we are not satisfied with the cause shown to justify the delay of 590/601 days. The day-to-day delay has not been explained. Hon’ble Supreme Court in a recent judgment of Anshul Aggarwal v. New Okhla Industrial Development Authority, IV (2011) CPJ 63 (SC) has held that while deciding the application filed for condonation of delay, the Court has to keep in mind that special period of limitation has been prescribed under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, for filing appeals and revisions in consumer matter and the object of expeditious adjudication of the consumer disputes, will get defeated if the appeals and revisions, which are highly belated are entertained.
As mentioned in the aforesaid judgment, the parties concerned have to establish sufficient cause in the said application for the condonation that the respective individual while preferring the statutory Appeal or any other application as per the Act and rule framed thereunder has not acted negligently or there was deliberate inaction or dilatory tactics on the part of the individual for not making the application within the period of limitation prescribed under the Act. It is pertinent to note that the said sufficient cause will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and the same shall be determined by the Court(s)/ Tribunals(s)/ Regulatory bodies wherein the said application is preferred.
Conclusion
As explained in the aforesaid judgments that the said individual has to explain the sufficient cause in the application for the Condonation of Delay for filing the Appeal/Written Statement/ Rejoinder etc. as the case may be. The individual may consider explaining the day-to-day delay as to what caused the individual delay in filing the said Appeal/ Complaint/ Suit/ Written Statement etc. that to my mind will show the bonafide of the individual to show the sufficient cause which stopped the individual to prefer the said Appeal/ Complaint etc. in the statutory time frame cast upon by the relevant Acts and the Rules made thereunder[2].
The author of this article can be reached at dachambersconnect@outlook.com for any discussion or clarification. Please feel free to drop a mail.
[1] Mr. Deepanshu Arora, holds a degree in B.Com from University of Delhi and Law
[2] Disclaimer – This is solely for informational purposes/ knowledge sharing and this information should not be considered as legal, professional advice, service, advertisement, or solicitation in any manner whatsoever. Deepanshu Arora further assumes no liability for the interpretation and/or use of the information contained in this post, nor does it offer a warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. The contents of the information are provided “as is”, with no guarantees of genuineness, completeness, accuracy, or timeliness, and without representations, warranties, or other contractual terms of any kind, express or implied. Please reach out to your professional for advice before making any decision w.r.t to the contents of the information.
Author Bio
