Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Union of India Th.G.M., Western Rly. & Anr. vs Fataji Chaturji & Ors.

Supreme Court11 September 2008Aftab Alam · Tarun Chatterjee

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Condonation of delay in filing Letters Patent Appeals may be granted where the appellants offer reasonable explanations for the delay and the circumstances of the case warrant it, notwithstanding that the delay exceeds a substantial period such as 148 days. The appellate court in considering such applications should exercise discretion to condone delays in filings and restore the appeals to the file for substantive disposal, rather than dismiss them on the procedural ground of delay alone, provided that the merits and maintainability of the substantive appeal remain open for consideration at the time of final hearing.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIACIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5606 OF 2008(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 16684 of 2008)
Union of India through General Manager,Western Railway, Mumbai & Anr. ....Appellants
Versus

Fataji Chaturji & Ors. ...Respondents

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. This is an appeal filed at the instance of

Union of India against the Judgment and

final order dated 29th of December, 2005

passed by the High Court of Gujarat in Civil

Application Nos. 12992 to 13002 of 2005

with Letters Patent Appeal Nos. 1446 to

1456 of 2005, by which the High Court had

refused to condone the delay of 148 days in

filing the Letters Patent Appeals. 2

3. We have heard Mr. B. Dutta, learned

Additional Solicitor General, appearing for

the appellants and Mr. Vimal Chandra S.

Dave, learned counsel appearing for the

respondents and considering the facts and

circumstances of the case and the

explanations offered by the appellants in

their application for condonation of delay,

we are of the view that the delay in filing the

LPAs must be condoned and LPAs be

restored to its original file. Accordingly, we

order the same.

4. The High Court is therefore requested to

dispose of the LPAs on merits and in

accordance with law within a period of eight

weeks from the date of supply of a copy of

this order to it. It is also made clear that at

the time of hearing of the LPAs, it would be

open to the parties to question the

maintainability of the appeal before the 3

Division Bench, which shall also be taken

into consideration at the time of such

disposal.

5. Accordingly, the impugned orders of the

High Court are set aside. The appeal is

thus allowed to the extent indicated above.

There will be no order as to costs.

............................J. [Tarun Chatterjee]

New Delhi; ... ............... .........J. September 11, 2008. [Aftab Alam]

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free