Unless the delay in filing is condoned, the appeal cannot be said to have come into existence in the eyes of law.
In a recent judgment, Hon’ble High Court has held that limitation is jurisdictional issue. unless the delay in filing is condoned, the appeal cannot be said to have come into existence in the eyes of law.
ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
4754 (2025) (09) abcaus.in HC
In the instant case, the appellant had raised a legal issue as to whether the appellate Court, without adverting to the question of limitation could have admitted and allowed the time-barred appeal.
The Petitioner/his father had filed an application under the provisions of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, before the Deputy Collector for demarcation of boundaries of land. Thereafter, on the basis of the Revenue Inspector’s report an order was passed by Deputy Collector and the demarcation of the land in question was done by the Tehsildar and the Lekhpal.
The opposite party (respondent) against the order of the Dy Collector, after 10 months filed an appeal before Appellate Court/Additional Commissioner which was admitted and an interim order came to be passed passed directing the parties to maintain ‘status quo’ and finally, the Additional Commissioner allowed the appeal of the opposite party.
Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgement and order passed by Additional Commissioner, the petitioners filed the instant writ petition inter alia raising several grounds. However, the argument majorly revolved around that Additional Commissioner erred in deciding the time-barred appeal on merit by allowing the same without condoning the delay in filing the said appeal.
The Petitioner submitted that Section 24(4) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 clearly prescribes the limitation period of 30 days for filing of an appeal while, in the present case, the respondent filed the appeal against the order of Dy. Collector with a delay of over ten months but the Appellate Court by completely ignoring the petitioners’ objections in that regard, proceeded to decide the Appeal on merits.
The Hon’ble High Court observed that it is a well-settled proposition of law that the question of limitation is not a mere technicality but pertains to the very jurisdiction of the Court, striking at the root of the appellate authority’s competence to entertain the appeal. Unless the delay in filing is condoned, the appeal cannot be said to have come into existence in the eyes of law. In the absence of a validly instituted appeal, the Court lacks jurisdiction to hear and decide a time-barred appeal on merits. Unless delay is condoned in accordance with law, the appeal cannot be treated as having been validly instituted.
The Hon’ble High Court observed as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court 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 length of the delay is a relevant matter which the court must take into consideration while considering whether the delay should be condoned or not. The Hon’ble Apex Court held that while considering the plea for condonation of delay, the court must not start with the merits of the main matter. However, the courts are required to condone delay on the bedrock of the principle that adjudication of a lis on merits is seminal to justice dispensation system. The court owes a duty to first ascertain the bona fides of the explanation offered by the party seeking condonation. It is only if the sufficient cause assigned by the litigant and the opposition of the other side is equally balanced that the court may bring into aid the merits of the matter for the purpose of condoning the delay.
The Hon’ble High Court opined that it is trite in law that if an appeal filed after the expiry of the limitation period is accompanied by an application for condonation of delay supported by an affidavit stating sufficient cause for delay in filing the said appeal and if the appellate court finds the cause sufficient for condonation of delay, the appellate court must record its reasons to that effect. Without condoning the delay in filing an appeal, the appellate authority lacks jurisdiction to entertain such time-barred appeals.
Therefore, the Hon’ble High Court concurred with the contention of the Petitioner that the appellate authority could not have decided the appeal on merits without condoning the delay. In the absence of an order for condonation of delay in a time-barred appeal the same could not have been entertained.
In view of the above, the Hon’ble High Court remanded the matter to the appellate authority to decide the issue of limitation after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties. If the delay in filing the appeal is found to be satisfactorily explained, the appellate authority shall pass a specific order condoning the delay and thereafter proceed to decide the appeal on merits.
Download Full Judgment Click Here >>
- Unless delay in filing condoned, appeal does not come into existence
- MCA further allows conducting AGMs/EGMs through video conferencing/audio visual
- Mentioning different place of loading of goods in e-way bill is violation of section 129
- TDS on AMCs whether to be deducted u/s 194C or u/s 194J – ITAT to examine
- Fraud & deception not trade and business and money accumulated is proceeds of crime
