Courts Must Balance Citizen's Rights & Adherence To Timelines, Delay Must Not Be Exploited: J&K High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has underscored the necessity of distinguishing between genuine explanations for delays and inordinate, unexplained delays in judicial matters. The Court held that while it has a duty to protect citizens' rights, it must remain vigilant against allowing parties to misuse the system by approaching courts at their convenience without sufficient cause. They argued the delay was unjustified and pointed to the appellant's consistent failure to honor court obligations, despite engaging a new counsel in January 2023. Referring to Supreme Court judgments, including Union of India v. Jahangir Byramji Jeejeebhoy and Pathapati Subba Reddy v. Special Deputy Collector, the court reiterated that that the law of limitation serves public policy by ensuring the timely resolution of disputes and courts are obligated to reject appeals filed beyond limitation without sufficient cause. “The appellant initiated steps for filing an application under Order IX Rule 13 and application for condonation of delay, after the notice was issued upon her in the execution petition filed by the respondent on 11.07.2023, which indicates that she was following the proceedings filed by the respondent”, the court remarked.