Length Of Delay Not Decisive, Unsatisfactory Explanation Cannot Justify Even Short Delays: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that even a brief delay in filing a petition cannot be condoned if the explanation offered is not satisfactory.

The court observed that while the duration of delay is not always decisive, a delay, no matter how long, can be excused if properly justified. However, without sufficient explanation, even short delays cannot be overlooked.

“Of course, the length of delay may not be the decisive factor, in the sense that if satisfactorily explained, the delay of a much longer period can also be condoned. But if the explanation is not satisfactory, even a few days of delay cannot be condoned. Present is a case of absolutely no explanation, let alone a satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the appeal,” the Bench of Justice Girish Kathpalia observed.

The Single-Judge Bench also emphasized that the discretion to condone delays must be exercised judiciously. 

The Court added that the court cannot extend leniency to litigants who fail to provide a legitimate reason for their delay or approach the court with unclean hands. “The expression 'sufficient cause' in terms of Section 5 of the Limitation Act must be construed liberally. But in the name of liberal construction, the law related to limitation cannot be rendered otiose,” the Court remarked.

The case involved Akash Pack Tech Limited, which sought condonation of delay in filing an appeal against a decree dated October 3, 2018, issued by the Additional District and Sessions Judge at Karkardooma Court. The limitation period for filing the appeal expired on January 2, 2019, but the appeal was not filed until nearly a year later, on December 24, 2019.

The appellant’s counsel attributed the delay to “administrative exigency” within the company, claiming that an official handling the litigation left their job, causing the company to lose track of the proceedings.

However, the Court found the explanation to be inconsistent with the record. It noted that there was no mention of this “administrative exigency” in the application for condonation of delay.

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

Consequently, noting that in the present case there is absolutely no explanation for the delay in filing the appeal, the Court rejected the application for condonation of delay.

"I do not find it a fit case to exercise discretion in favour of the appellant. As such the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed as time barred and the pending applications stand disposed of," the Court ordered. 

Cause Title: Akash Pack Tech[p] Limited v. M/S Today Tea Limited [Neutral Citation No. 2024:DHC: 7486]

Appearance:-

Appellant: Advocate Shubhangda Singh

Respondent: Advocate Priyanka Rai

Click here to read/download the Order