Read Time: 06 minutes
Court has held that insufficient funds could not have been a sufficient ground for condonation of delay, and it would be an entirely different matter had the appeal been filed in terms of Section 149 CPC and thereafter removed the defects by paying deficit court fees.
Not having sufficient funds to pay the court fee, cannot be a sufficient reason for the condonation of delay, the Supreme Court held on Tuesday.
"...even it is presumed for the sake of argument that the appellant was short of funds, at the relevant point of time and was not able to pay court fee, nothing barred him from filing the appeal as there is provision under the law for filing a defective appeal, i.e., an appeal which is deficient as far as court fee is concerned, provided the court fee is paid within the time given by the Court", a division bench has further observed.
Court in this regard referred to Section 149 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 which states if whole or part of any fee prescribed for any document by the law has not been paid, the Court may, in its discretion, at any stage, allow the person, by whom such fee is payable, to pay the whole or part, and upon such payment the document, shall have the same force and effect as if such fee had been paid in the first instance.
A bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Sudhanshu Dhulia made these observations while dismissing an appeal filed by a businessman whose suit and the first appeal were both dismissed on grounds of delay.
The impugned order dismissed the delay condonation applications filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, declining to condone a delay of 254 days, because the reasons assigned for the condonation were not sufficient reasons for condonation of the delay.
Top Court noted that an appeal has to be filed within the stipulated period, prescribed under the law.
"Belated appeals can only be condoned, when sufficient reason is shown before the court for the delay. The appellant who seeks condonation of delay therefore must explain the delay of each day. It is true that the courts should not be pedantic in their approach while condoning the delay, and explanation of each day’s delay should not be taken literally, but the fact remains that there must be a reasonable explanation for the delay....", Court has remarked.
Furthermore, the division bench found that in the present case, the delay had not been explained to the satisfaction of the court and the only reason assigned for the delay of 254 days in filing the First Appeal was that he was not having sufficient funds to pay the court fee!
"This was not found to be a sufficient reason for the condonation of delay as the appellant was an affluent businessman and a hotelier", the bench observed while deciding to not interfere in the matter.
Case Title: AJAY DABRA vs. PYARE RAM & ORS
Please Login or Register
