Litigant Seeking To Condone Delay Must Explain Why Appeal Was Not Filed From First Day Within Limitation Period : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that when a litigant applies to condone the delay in the filing of an appeal, then they should also explain why the appeal was not filed within the limitation period itself. In other words, an explanation of the delay from the period when the limitation ended is not sufficient. They have to explain why the appeal was not filed before the expiry of the limitation period.

While the Court acknowledged that a litigant has the right to wait till the last day of the limitation to file an appeal, when they allow the limitation period to expire, they have to explain why the appeal was not filed within the period itself.

A bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan made the observations while dismissing an appeal filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh seeking to condone the delay of over 5 years in filing a second appeal. 

Relying on Ajit Singh Thakur Singh and Another v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1981 SC 733, the bench observed :

"There is one another aspect of the matter which we must not ignore or overlook. Over a period of time, we have noticed that whenever there is a plea for condonation of delay be it at the instance of a private litigant or State the delay is sought to be explained right from the time, the limitation starts and if there is a delay of say 2 years or 3 years or 4 years till the end of the same. For example if the period of limitation is 90 days then the party seeking condonation has to explain why it was unable to institute the proceedings within that period of limitation. What events occurred after the 91st day till the last is of no consequence. The court is required to consider what came in the way of the party that it was unable to file it between the 1st day and the 90th day. It is true that a party is entitled to wait until the last day of limitation for filing an appeal. But when it allows the limitation to expire and pleads sufficient cause for not filing the appeal earlier, the sufficient cause must establish that because of some event or circumstance arising before the limitation expired it was not possible to file the appeal within time. No event or circumstance arising after the expiry of limitation can constitute such sufficient cause. There may be events or circumstances subsequent to the expiry of limitation which may further delay the filing of the appeal. But that the limitation has been allowed to expire without the appeal being filed must be traced to a cause arising within the period of limitation."

Also from the judgment - Penalize Govt Officers Who Cause Delay In Filing Of Appeals : Supreme Court Directs All States

Case : State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ramkumar Choudhary