Pintu Debbarma vs Sunita Marak

This is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay of 33 days in preferring the connected appeal.

Learned counsel for the respondent-husband states that he has no objection to the application being allowed.

Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties as also perused the records so made available, this Court is of the considered view that there is no deliberate or intentional delay in filing the appeal, which occurred on account of bona fide reasons, as stated in paragraph-4 of the application.

In State (NCT of Delhi) vs. Ahmed Jaan, (2008) 14 SCC 582 the Court has held that "The expression "sufficient cause" should, therefore, be considered with pragmatism in justice-oriented approach rather than the technical detection of sufficient cause for explaining every day's delay."

The above principle of law was further reiterated more explicitly by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ummer vs. Pottengal Subida and Ors., (2018) 15 SCC 127 wherein the

Court held that "One cannot now dispute the legal proposition that the earlier view of this Court that the Appellant was required to explain the delay of each day till the date of filing the appeal has since been diluted by the later decisions of this Court and is, therefore, held as no longer good law."

The principle which thus can be fairly deduced is that the Court should not get into technicality and in seeking explanation for delay of each and every day from the defaulting party.

Upon perusal of facts and hearing of parties, and taking into consideration the observations of the Apex Court (supra), this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the connected appeal.

Therefore, having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and the cause shown by the applicant, which is duly substantiated by the presentation of relevant documents and the accompanying affidavit, this Court is inclined to hold that the cause shown by the applicant seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal before this High Court is a sufficient cause, within the meaning of Section 5 of the Limitation Act and, therefore, the application filed by the applicant deserves to be allowed.

Delay is accordingly condoned and the appeal is held to have been filed within limitation.

The application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.