Condonation Of Delay Should Be Construed Liberally Rather Than Taking Parochial Approach: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that condonation of delay application must be dealt with liberally otherwise it will cause obstruction of justice. Any court or tribunal dealing with delay condonation must consider the facts and circumstances stated in the application before rejecting the same, the Court held.

“Any order passed either allowing the application for condonation of delay or rejecting the same without recording a finding sufficiently would be arbitrary and liable to be interfered by the superior courts,” held Justice Alok Mathur.

Factual Background

Appellant claimed that there was a delay of 103, 242, 62, 124 days in filing appeals before the Real Estate Regulatory Authority Tribunal against orders passed by Real Estate Regulatory Authority. Delay condonation applications filed by the petitioner wherein it was stated that due to absence of the Office Superintendent and Finance and Accounts Officer at the Trans Ganga Office, appeals could not be processed. Further, it was stated that a similar appeal which was decided by the Tribunal was challenged before and entertained by the High Court. Accordingly, decision was taken to file the remaining appeals before the Tribunal.

Appellant contended that the delay ought to have been condoned as the reasons were duly explained and were beyond the control of the appellant. Further, it was argued that incase the respondents disputed the facts stated in the affidavit filed along with the delay condonation application, the same should have been heard by the Tribunal before rejecting the appeal.

Accordingly, the question for the consideration of the Court was:

"Whether learned Tribunal was justified in dismissing the application for condonation of delay without appreciating or dismissing the reasons stated by the appellant for condonation of delay and as to whether the exercise of power would be de hors the principle enunciated in various judgements of Hon'ble Supreme Court."

High Court Verdict

The Court held that a court or tribunal considering application for condonation of delay must consider the facts asserted in support of the application. Findings must be recorded on whether the facts detailed are sufficient for condoning the delay or otherwise.

The Court relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnagh and another Vs. MST. Katiji and others which has been recently followed in Raheem Shah & Anr. Vs. Govind Singh & Ors, to observe that when substantive rights of a person are pitted against the procedural law, the former will prevail over the latter.

“Following the same line of reasoning, this court is of the opinion that when any authority/tribunal/court is deciding any appeal then the question of condonation of delay should be construed liberally rather than taking a parochial approach. A pedantic approach while deciding on matters where condonation is in question shall only act as an obstacle in the interest of justice and thus, while exercising its discretion the courts should apply their mind and ponder upon whether there existed a legitimate cause due to which the said delay became inevitable.”

In the present case, the Court held that though the Tribunal considered judgments of the Supreme Court, however, it failed to consider the facts stated in the delay condonation application while rejecting 34 appeals filed by the appellant. The Court noted that the appellant had sufficiently explained the delay.

Accordingly, the appeals were allowed and remanded back to the Tribunal for decision on merits.

Case Title: U.P. State Industrial Development Authority,Unnao Thru. Its Senior Project Officer/Regional Manager vs. Gurmeet Singh [RERA APPEAL No. - 28 of 2023]

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 384

Counsel for Appellant: Kartikey Dubey

Counsel for Respondent: Mohd.Murtaza Khan, Deepak Diwedi

Click Here To Read/Download Order