“Liberal view is to be adopted in matters of condonation of delay”: SC tells NDRC

Condonation of delay has been defined under section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 as the extension of the prescribed period in the certain matters. It preferred appeal and application and does not include suit as it is an exception to Bar of Limitation which is defined under the Act. For taking the benefit of the Doctrine the applicant must have sufficient cause. Some reasons for considering for the condonation of delay include; illness, imprisonment, other insufficient grounds like poverty (Vijay Kumar v. IFFCO) and other sufficient grounds like mistake of court.  The expression “sufficient cause” is flexible enough so as to enable the court to apply the law in a just manner. An avoidable cause for delay by due care and attention cannot be sufficient cause.

In  Hemlata Verma vs. M/s ICICI Prudential life Insurance Co. Ltd & Anr, the supreme court held that “in the matter of condonation, the consumer commission should take liberal view”.

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi held that the delay of 207 days in filling the revision petition was not properly explained by the appellant and therefore, no case is made out to condone of delay. The commission thereby did not go to the merits of the case.

The commission while declining to condone the delay placed reliance on the decision of the court in Ramlal vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. However the later decision in the case Collector, Land acquisition, Anantnag & Anr V. Mst. Katiji & Ors has held that in the matter of condonation of delay, the court should take a liberal view. Therefore the apex court held that “in our view, the commission should have taken note on subsequent decisions of this court on the issue of condonation of delay. The appeal is accordingly allowed”.

As observed by the Supreme Court in the State of M.P v. Prandeep Kumar, the object of the provision is two-fold; firstly to inform the appellant that the delayed appeal will not be entertained unless it is accompanied by an application accompanying the delay and secondly, to communicate to the respondent that it may not be necessary for him to get ready on merits as the court has to first deal with an application for condonation of delay as a condition precedent. 

Submitted by:- Bhavya Verma- INBA Intern