Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Sanjay Goyal vs Shanti Devi on 9 May, 2024

Author: Chandra Dhari Singh

Bench: Chandra Dhari Singh

                           $~92
                           *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                           +    RFA 120/2024

                                     SANJAY GOYAL                                                                     ..... Appellant
                                                                           Through:                Mr.Kunal Madan, Mr.Ishan Ahuja
                                                                                                   and Mr.Shyam Babu, Advocates
                                                                           versus

                                     SHANTI DEVI                                                                       ..... Respondent
                                                                           Through:                Ms.Malvika Trivedi, Senior Advocate
                                                                                                   with         Ms.Sonali       Malhotra,
                                                                                                   Mr.Shailendra    Slaria,     Ms.Sujal
                                                                                                   Gupta, Ms.Sakshi Singh and Ms.Jyoti
                                                                                                   Jha, Advocates

                                     CORAM:
                                     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH
                                                  ORDER

% 09.05.2024 CM APPL. No.9972/2024

1. The present application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, has been filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 54 days in re-filing the present appeal submitting to the effect that due to some renovation work going on in the office of the counsel for the appellant/applicant, some documents were lost. Consequently, the certified copies of those documents were again applied by the appellant and the same were received only on 8th December, 2023.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/applicant submitted that the delay in re-filing the appeal is neither intentional nor deliberate on part of the appellant and the delay occurred on every occassion has been duly explained.

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/05/2024 at 00:44:44

3. Per contra, Ms.Trivedi, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the non-applicant/respondent vehemently opposed the present application submitting to the effect that application is misconceived.

4. She further submitted that on perusal of the application, it is evident that the appellant was negligent about the filing of the appeal and the appellant has filed the instant appeal only after filing of the execution proceedings before the Execution Court,. Thus, no cogent reasons have been cited in the instant application seeking condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the contents made in the instant application as well as the reply filed on behalf of the non-applicant.

6. Considering the submission made on behalf of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant at bar, this Court is of the opinion that the said reasons stated for condonation of delay can be acceptable and therefore, the application is allowed and the delay of 54 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned.

7. The application stands disposed of.

1. The present application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been filed on behalf of the appellant/applicant seeking condonation of delay of 42 days in filing the present appeal.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that the delay of 42 days in filing the present appeal occurred due to the reasons that the counsel who was appearing before the District Judge was instructed This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/05/2024 at 00:44:44 to file the appeal, challenging the order dated 25th July, 2023, and thus the documents pertaining to the suit were kept lying with that counsel. However due to his personal reasons the previous counsel could not file the appeal and handed over the same to the appellant after about two months. It is submitted that on a perusal of the said file the appellant found that some of the documents in that file were missing, therefore, procuring the certified copies of those missing documents took some time and thereafter the file was handed over to the present counsel for the purpose of filing the present appeal.

3. It is further submitted that the present counsel took seven days in preparing the appeal and thereafter filed it on 17th November, 2023. It is submitted that the delay occurred in filing of the present appeal has been duly explained.

4. To support his contentions, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has placed reliance on the judgment of the High Court of Madras titled Meena v. R.K. Balan passed in C.R.P. (NPD) No. 4287 of 2017. Referring to paragraphs 11 of the said judgment, it is contended that the delay in filing the appeal is only 42 days and the same has been properly explained. Thus, the learned counsel for the applicant/appellant prayed that the present application be allowed and the delay of 42 days in filing the appeal be condoned.

5. Per contra, Ms.Trivedi, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/non-applicant, on instructions from Ms. Sonali, Advocate, vehemently opposed the said application submitting to the effect that the delay has not been properly explained and the negligence on the part of the appellant cannot be a ground for condoning the delay in filing the appeal This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/05/2024 at 00:44:44 and that too when valuable rights accrued in favour of the respondent/non- applicant.

6. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the averments made in the application, the reply filed on behalf of the non-applicant and the judgment of High Court of Madras relied upon by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant/appellant.

7. In view of the submissions and rival submissions made above and the material placed on record, the application is allowed and the delay of 42 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

RFA 120/2024 and CM APPL. No.9969/2024 (Stay) Heard.

Issue notice.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, appearing on advance notice, accepts notice and vehemently opposed the instant petition.

She further prayed for some time to file reply to the stay application. Let the same be filed within a period of 10 days. The rejoinder, thereto, if any, be filed within a period of one week thereafter.

List before Court on 18th July, 2024.

CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J MAY 9, 2024 rk/sv/av Click here to check corrigendum, if any This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/05/2024 at 00:44:44