Delay of even few days cannot be condoned if explanation not satisfactory: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court recently observed that delay of even a few days in filing a petition cannot be condoned if the explanation offered by the litigant for such delay is not satisfactory [Akash Pack Tech[p] Limited Vs. M/S Today Tea Limited].

The Court observed that the duration of the delay is not always the relevant factor and a delay even if long, can be be forgiven, if properly justified.

However, without sufficient explanation, even a short delay cannot be overlooked.

“Of course, length of delay may not be the decisive factor, in the sense that if satisfactorily explained, the delay of much longer period also can be condoned but if the explanation is not satisfactory, delay of even a few days cannot be condoned. Present is a case of absolutely no explanation, what to say of satisfactory explanation of delay in filing the appeal,” the Court said

Justice Girish Kathpalia emphasized that condonation of delay is a matter of Court's discretion which must be exercised judiciously. He added that it cannot be extended to a litigant who approaches the Court without clean hands.

“The expression “sufficient cause” in terms of the Section 5 of the Limitation Act must be construed liberally. But in the name of liberal construction of this expression, the law related to limitation cannot be rendered otiose,“ the Court said.

The case concerned an application filed by Akash Pack Tech Limited (appellant) seeking condonation of delay in filing an appeal against a decree dated October 3, 2018, passed by an Additional District & Sessions Judge of Karkardooma court.

While the limitation period to file the appeal before the Delhi High Court expired on January 2, 2019, the appeal was filed almost a year later, on December 24, 2019.

The counsel for the appellant attributed the delay to "administrative exigency" within the appellant-company.

However, the Court noted that the submissions made on behalf of the appellant were completely inconsistent with the material on record.

“Falling back to the present case, the submissions advanced today on behalf of appellant are completely inconsonant with record. To repeat, learned counsel for appellant explained the delay in filing the appeal on the ground that the official of the appellant dealing with the present litigation left job, so the appellant company lost track of the proceedings," the Court noted.

However, the application for condonation of delay mentioned no such exigency.

“In the entire application, there is not even a whisper of the alleged “administrative exigency” caused by the concerned official of the appellant leaving his job and the consequent losing of the litigation track by the appellant,” the Court said.

Hence, it proceeded to reject the application.

Advocate  Shubhangda Singh represented Akash Pack Tech(P) Limited.

Advocate  Priyanka Rai represented M/sToday Tea Limited, the respondent.

[Read Order]