Delay – Condonation of Gross delay of 12 years and 158 days – Question of limitation is not merely a technical consideration – Rules of limitation are based on the principles of sound public policy and principles of equity
On 9.3.1951, the bungalow No.15A at Pune Cantonment was leased by the respondent to the appellants.
In 1981, the respondent filed civil suit for possession of the property and arrears of rent. On 2.5.1987, the suit was decreed. Civil appeal of the appellants was dismissed in 1992. This was challenged in W.P.No.2307 of 1993 in the High Court of Bombay. On 26.11.2013, the respondent filed execution petition and on 18.3.2016 the appellants were served with the notice. However, the writ petition was dismissed on 10.10.2006 for non-prosecution.
HELD that it hardly matters whether a litigant is a private party or a State or Union of India when it comes to condoning the gross delay of more than 12 years. If the litigant chooses to approach the Court long after lapse of the prescribed time, then he cannot turn around and say that no prejudice would be cuased to either side by the delay being condoned. Almost 43 years of litigation have lapsed. Till date the respondent has not been able to reap the fruits of his decree. It would be a mockery of justice if we condone delay of 12 days and once again ask the respondent to undergo the rigmarole the legal proceedings. The Court should not keep the “Sword of Damocles” hanging over the head of the respondent for indefinite period of time to be determined at the whims and fancies of the appellants.
In a plethora of decisions of this Court, it has been said that delay should not be excused as a matter of generosity. Rendering substantial justice is not to cause prejudice to the opposite party. The length of delay is a relevant matter which the court must take into consideration. The question of limitation is not merely a technical consideration. The rules of limitation are based on the principles of sound public policy and principles of equity. The court owes a duty to first ascertain the bona fides of the explanation for condonation of delay.
Judgment dated 3.4.2024 in Civil Appeal No.4672 of 2024 (arising out of SLP (Civil) No.21096 of 2019) of Union of India and another Vs. Jahangir Byramji Jeejeebhoy (D) through his LR
