Supreme Court of India
Collector Land Acquisition
Vs.
Mst. Katiji & Ors.
Date of Judgment 19/02/1987
Bench: THAKKAR, M.P. (J) RAY, B.C. (J)
Citation: 1987 AIR 1353, 1987 SCR (2) 387, 1987 SCC (2) 107, JT 1987 (1) 537, 1987 SCALE (1)413
CITATOR INFO: R 1988 SC 897 (7)
ACT:
Indian Limitation Act, 1963; s.5–Condoning delay in filingappeal–Existence of ‘sufficient cause’-Determination of State seeking condonation of delay To be treated equitably.
HEADNOTE:
An appeal by the State. against a decision enhancing compensation in respect of acquisition of lands for a public purpose, raising important questions as regards principles of valuation, was dismissed by the High Court as time barred, being four days beyond time, by rejecting an application for condonation of dalay. The State appealed to this Court by special leave.Allowing the appeal,
HELD:
1.1 The expression ‘sufficient cause’ employed by the legislature in s.5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963 is adequately elastic to enable the Courts to do substantial justice to parties by disposing of matters on merits. [388E-F]
1.2 The State which represents the collective cause of the community does not deserve a litigant-non-grata status. The doctrine of equality before law demands that all litigants,including the State as a litigant, are accorded the same treatment and the law is administered in an equitable manner. The Courts, therefore, have to be informed with the spirit and philosophy of the provision in the course of the interpretation of the expression ‘sufficient cause’. So also the same approach has to be evidenced in its application to matters at hand with the end in view to doeven handed justice on merits in preference to the approach which scuttles a decision on merits. [390B-C]
2. In the instant case, sufficient cause exists for delay in instituting the appeal in the High Court. Delay is, therefore, condoned. The matter is remitted to the High Court for disposal on merits. [390C-D]
Comments are closed.