Lukose vs Babu

C.S.Dias, J

The application is filed to condone the delay of 449 days in filing the appeal.

The petitioner has averred in the affidavit filed in support of the application that even though the award was passed on 25.7.2014, her counsel had

made the application for certified copy of the award on 11.12.2014. It was only after getting the award, the appeal could be filed. In the process, a

delay of 449 days has occurred in filing the appeal.

The application is vehementally opposed by the 3rd respondent, who has filed a detailed counter affidavit, inter alia, stating that the reason

mentioned in the application is not convincing and there is no bona fides in the averments in the affidavit. Hence the application is only liable to be

dismissed.

The law in respect of condonation of delay is well settled in a plethora of decision.

In Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr v. Katiji & Ors [(1987) 2 SCC 107], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the expression

'sufficient cause' is adequately elastic to enable the courts to apply the law in a meaningful manner which sub-serves the ends of justice and that a

liberal approach has to be adopted while dealing with applications for condonation of delay.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Oriental Aroma Chemical Industries Ltd v. Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation and Another [

(2010) 5 SCC 459] has held that Court shall adopt a liberal approach in condoning the delay of short duration and a stricter approach

where the delay is inordinate.

Therefore, it is by now trite that a case has to be decided on merits, after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard, rather than dismissing the

same on technicalities or default, but a stricter approach has to be adopted when there is inordinate delay.

Although the reasons mentioned in the affidavit are not at all that convincing and satisfactory, I am of the considered opinion that a lenient view can

be taken in the matter by permitting the petitioners to contest the case on its merits by directing the petitioners to pay a reasonable amount as costs,

dis-entitling them from getting any interest during the period of delay, which would tide over the hardship and prejudice caused to the respondents .

In the result, I allow the application on the following conditions:

(i) The petitioners shall deposit/pay an amount of Rs.1,000/- as costs to the 3rd respondent/learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent before this Court, within

a period of three weeks from today, and file a memo to the effect.

(ii) Only if the memo is filed within the prescribed time, the application will stand allowed and the delay will stand condoned, otherwise, the application will stand

dismissed.

(iii) If ultimately the appeal is allowed in favour of the petitioners and compensation is enhanced,they would be dis-entitled for interest for a period of 449 days.

 (iv) Post the appeal after three weeks.