Not Necessary To File Separate Application For Delay Condonation Along With Application To Set Aside Ex-Parte Decree : Supreme Court
3 months ago

Not Necessary To File Separate Application For Delay Condonation Along With Application To Set Aside Ex-Parte Decree : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court ruled that a separate application seeking condonation of delay is not necessary to be filed along with an application seeking to set aside an ex-parte decree under Order IX Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Code, if the application sufficiently explains the delay. The bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prasanna B. Varale was hearing an appeal challenging the Allahabad High Court's decision, which upheld the First Appellate Court's ruling that overturned the trial court's order allowing the restoration application filed by the Appellant-Defendant for restoration of the ex-parte decree passed against him. The First Appellate Court overturned the trial court's decision citing that a separate application as per Section 5 of the Limitation Act was not filed along with the Order IX Rule 13 application. “The question of filing Order 9 Rule 13 application was, in our opinion, rightly considered by the appellate court on merits and the appellate court was absolutely right in coming to the conclusion that the appellant defendants were fully justified in filing the application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC at the time when they actually filed it and the delay in filing the application was also fully explained on account of the fact that they never knew about the decree and the orders starting the ex parte proceedings against them.

Court Restoration Application Order Delay Cpc Filed Rule File Separate Decree Condonation Order Ix Rule 13 Order Ix Rule Order 9 Rule 13 Delay Condonation Separate Application  exparte  condonation  separate  delay  necessary  rule  application  filed  order  court  restoration  supreme  set  file  decree

History of this topic

Supreme Court Wonders Why NCLAT Wrote Long Order On Delay Condonation Application Despite High Pendency
3 weeks, 3 days ago

Supreme Court Wonders Why NCLAT Wrote Long Order On Delay Condonation Application Despite High Pendency

Live Law  

The Supreme Court recently expressed surprise that the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, despite having a high pendency of cases, devoted extensive time and effort to writing a 17-page order on a delay condonation application. “We wonder why the NCLAT which has a high pendency should devote so much of time and energy in writing an order running into 17 …

Order XXII Rule 4 CPC | Supreme Court Explains Correct Procedure To File Applications To Substitute Legal Heirs, Set Aside Abatement & Condone Delay
Trending News
1 month, 2 weeks ago

Order XXII Rule 4 CPC | Supreme Court Explains Correct Procedure To File Applications To Substitute Legal Heirs, Set Aside Abatement & Condone Delay

Live Law  

The Supreme Court has issued a clarification regarding the substitution of legal heirs in ongoing litigation, addressing a frequent procedural misstep by lawyers. "Thus, the total time-frame for filing an application for substitution and for setting aside abatement, as outlined in Articles 120 and 121 of the Limitation Act, is 150 days. Moreover, if the lawyer misses both the opportunity, …

Order XXII Rule 4 CPC | No Separate Prayer To Set Aside Abatement Needed If Application To Substitute Legal Heirs Is Filed: Supreme Court
1 month, 2 weeks ago

Order XXII Rule 4 CPC | No Separate Prayer To Set Aside Abatement Needed If Application To Substitute Legal Heirs Is Filed: Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court held that if an appeal abates due to the failure to substitute legal heirs, filing a substitution application under Order XXII Rule 4 CPC eliminates the need for a separate application to set aside the abatement. “When an application praying for substitution had been made, then, even assuming that it does not have an explicit prayer for …

Application U/S 7 Of IBC Must Be Decided First When Application U/S 54C Is Filed 14 Days After S.7 Application: NCLAT
1 month, 2 weeks ago

Application U/S 7 Of IBC Must Be Decided First When Application U/S 54C Is Filed 14 Days After S.7 Application: NCLAT

Live Law  

The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Mr. Barun Mitra has held that when an application under section 54C of the IBC is filed after 14 days from the date of the application filed under section 7 of the IBC, the application under section 7 must be decided first as per section 11A of the code. Contentions: …

166 Days Delay In Re-Filing Appeal Cannot Be Condoned In Absence Of Genuine And Plausible Explanation: NCLAT
2 months, 2 weeks ago

166 Days Delay In Re-Filing Appeal Cannot Be Condoned In Absence Of Genuine And Plausible Explanation: NCLAT

Live Law  

The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Mr. Barun Mitra has held that a delay of 166 in re-filing an appeal cannot be condoned in the absence of a plausible and genuine explanation offered for the same. No.6903 of 2024 is an application praying for condonation of 166 days delay in refiling an appeal. When the Appeal …

Sufficiency Of Reasons Over Number Of Days Is Considered While Determining Plea Of Condonation Of Delay U/S 37(1)(2) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi HC
3 months, 1 week ago

Sufficiency Of Reasons Over Number Of Days Is Considered While Determining Plea Of Condonation Of Delay U/S 37(1)(2) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Saurabh Banerjee held that the appellant failed to demonstrate any plausible reasons for the delay caused in filing the present appeal. The appeal was also accompanied by two applications, the first seeking condonation of 670 days delay in filing the appeal and the second 591 days delay in re-filing …

Litigant Seeking To Condone Delay Must Explain Why Appeal Was Not Filed From First Day Within Limitation Period : Supreme Court
3 months, 3 weeks ago

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

Live Law  

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. While the Court acknowledged that a litigant has the right to wait till the last day of the limitation to file an appeal, when …

Condonation Of Delay Is Case Specific, No Inflexible Rule Can Be Laid Down To Condone Delay U/S 61 Of IBC: NCLAT
4 months, 2 weeks ago

Condonation Of Delay Is Case Specific, No Inflexible Rule Can Be Laid Down To Condone Delay U/S 61 Of IBC: NCLAT

Live Law  

The NLCAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan, Barun Mitra and Arun Baroka affirmed that the condonation of delay in filing of the Appeal is on facts of each case, no inflexible rule can be laid down while exercising jurisdiction to condone the delay. The Applicant states that he was unable to file the present Appeal against the order …

Directing Deposit Of 75% Suit Claim To Condone Delay & Set Aside Exparte Decree Unwarranted & Disproportionate: Supreme Court
1 year ago

Directing Deposit Of 75% Suit Claim To Condone Delay & Set Aside Exparte Decree Unwarranted & Disproportionate: Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court in a recent order on deprecated the condition imposed by the High Court for the deposit of 75% of suit claim to condone delay and set aside an ex parte order. However, on September 14 2023, the Single Judge directed that the ex parte decree could be set aside upon the condition of appellant depositing 75% of …

Condonation Of Delay Is An Exception, Should Not Be Used As Per Convenience Of Government Departments: Delhi High Court
1 year, 7 months ago

Condonation Of Delay Is An Exception, Should Not Be Used As Per Convenience Of Government Departments: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has observed that condonation of delay is an exception which should not be used as per convenience of the Government departments. Justice Chandra Dhari Singh added that courts must not treat Government agencies differently while deciding the applications for condonation of delay and that the Government is under “special obligation” to ensure that their duties are. …

Ex-Parte Decree | Remedies Under Order 9 Rule 13 & Section 96 CPC Are Concurrent, Can Be Resorted To Simultaneously: Jammu & Kashmir High Court
1 year, 10 months ago

Ex-Parte Decree | Remedies Under Order 9 Rule 13 & Section 96 CPC Are Concurrent, Can Be Resorted To Simultaneously: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Live Law  

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has reiterated that remedies under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC and Section 96 of the CPC, which allow for setting aside an ex parte judgment and filing an appeal, respectively, are concurrent and can be resorted to simultaneously. Elaborating on the subject the bench observed, ".The said two remedies are provided by …

Can't Condone Delay If Applicant Fails To Show ‘Sufficient Cause’ For The Delay: Jharkhand High Court Reiterates
2 years, 1 month ago

Can't Condone Delay If Applicant Fails To Show ‘Sufficient Cause’ For The Delay: Jharkhand High Court Reiterates

Live Law  

The Jharkhand High Court has reiterated that the court should not allow an application for condonation of delay until and unless the applicant satisfies the court that he was prevented by any ‘sufficient cause’ from prosecuting the case. While dismissing the second appeal, Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi observed: “The applicant must satisfy the Court that he was prevented by. While …

Order XLI Rule 3-A CPC | Failure To File Appeal With Application For Condonation Of Delay Curable Defect, Can Be Filed Subsequently: J&K&L High Court
2 years, 6 months ago

Order XLI Rule 3-A CPC | Failure To File Appeal With Application For Condonation Of Delay Curable Defect, Can Be Filed Subsequently: J&K&L High Court

Live Law  

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court while answering a question as to what are the consequences if an appeal is not accompanied by an application as mentioned in Subrule of Rule 3A in Order 41 of CPC observed, "The Deficiency of not accompanying application for condonation of delay is curable defect and if required such an application can …

[Order XXII Rule 3 CPC] Delay In Filing Application For Substitution Of Legal Heirs Must Be Sufficiently Explained: Delhi High Court
2 years, 8 months ago

[Order XXII Rule 3 CPC] Delay In Filing Application For Substitution Of Legal Heirs Must Be Sufficiently Explained: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has held that applications under Order XXII Rule 3 of CPC for substitution of legal heirs, or under Order XXII Rule 9 of the Code for setting aside abatement of proceedings must be considered liberally. The issues that arose for consideration in this case were– whether the consumer complaint case filed by the respondents had abated …

Section 8 Application Should Be Filed Within Time Available For Filing Written Statement: Delhi High Court
2 years, 8 months ago

Section 8 Application Should Be Filed Within Time Available For Filing Written Statement: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has ruled that if a party fails to file an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for referring the parties to arbitration within the time available for filing the first statement on the substance of the dispute, which would include a written statement in the context of a suit, the party …

District Forums To Decide Plea For Condonation Of Delay As Preliminary Issue Before Proceeding To Decide The Complaint On Merits: UP State Consumer Commission
2 years, 9 months ago

District Forums To Decide Plea For Condonation Of Delay As Preliminary Issue Before Proceeding To Decide The Complaint On Merits: UP State Consumer Commission

Live Law  

The Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Commission by a recent judgment in the case of Balrampur Nursing Home vs. Shri Dhokhai while allowing a revision petition has held that as per the provisions contained in S. 69 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019, it is imperative for the District Consumer Forums to decide the Applications for Condonation of Delay as …

Limitation Period Cannot Be Extended On Equitable Grounds: Supreme Court
3 years ago

Limitation Period Cannot Be Extended On Equitable Grounds: Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court observed that an application for condonation of delay has to be dismissed if it is found that the delay is not properly explained and that the period of limitation cannot be extended on equitable ground.Otherwise, it would be giving a premium to a person who fails to explain the delay and who is guilty of delay and …

Order IX Rule 13 CPC | Defendant Can Only Take Part In Hearing After Ex-Parte Decree Against It Is Set Aside, Can't File Written Statement: Orissa HC
3 years, 1 month ago

Order IX Rule 13 CPC | Defendant Can Only Take Part In Hearing After Ex-Parte Decree Against It Is Set Aside, Can't File Written Statement: Orissa HC

Live Law  

The Orissa High Court has reiterated that even after an ex parte decree is set aside under Order IX Rule 13 of the CPC, the defendant neither can be relegated to the original position nor can be allowed to file a written statement. 2 and 3 for their non-appearance on the date when the suit was called on for hearing, …

Applications To Condone Delay In Filing Version In Consumer Cases Pending On 04.03.2020 Not Impacted By CB Judgment : SC Clarifies
3 years, 3 months ago

Applications To Condone Delay In Filing Version In Consumer Cases Pending On 04.03.2020 Not Impacted By CB Judgment : SC Clarifies

Live Law  

Settling a conflict between two division bench judgments, a 3-judge bench of the Supreme Court on Tuesday clarified that the applications to condone the delay of more than 45 days in filing the version of the opposite party in consumer cases, which were pending as of March 4, 2020, will not be impacted by the ruling of the Constitution Bench …

BREAKING : Conflicting Judgments On Prospective Application Of Ruling On Delay Condonation For Version In Consumer Cases - Supreme Court Refers To Larger Bench
3 years, 3 months ago

BREAKING : Conflicting Judgments On Prospective Application Of Ruling On Delay Condonation For Version In Consumer Cases - Supreme Court Refers To Larger Bench

Live Law  

A 2-judge bench of the Supreme Court has expressed the need for a larger bench decision on the issue regarding the prospective operation of the Constitution Bench judgment in the case New India Assurance Company Limited vs. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Private Limited, which had held that Consumer Forum cannot condone the delay of more than 45 days in filing …

Whether It Is Mandatory To File A Formal Application For Condonation Of Delay? An Examination Of SC Judgement In Sesh Nath Sing's Case
3 years, 10 months ago

Whether It Is Mandatory To File A Formal Application For Condonation Of Delay? An Examination Of SC Judgement In Sesh Nath Sing's Case

Live Law  

in the context of the aforesaid issue. Eventually, a Writ Petition was filed by the said Respondent in the Patna High Court that held that the appeal before the Additional Collector ought to have been dismissed on the ground of limitation "as no application was filed for condonation of delay as contemplated by Section 5 of the Limitation Act." The …

Application Under Order IX Rule 13 CPC Can Be Allowed Only When Sufficient Cause Is Made Out To Set Aside Ex­ Parte Decree: Supreme Court
4 years ago

Application Under Order IX Rule 13 CPC Can Be Allowed Only When Sufficient Cause Is Made Out To Set Aside Ex­ Parte Decree: Supreme Court

Live Law  

Application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure cannot be automatically granted and can be allowed only when sufficient cause is made out to set aside the ex­ parte decree, the Supreme Court observed.In this case, the tenant had filed an application to set aside an ex-parte decree against him which was dismissed by the Trial …

DRT Has No Power To Condone Delay In Filing Review Application Under RDB Act : SC [Read Judgment]
5 years, 2 months ago

DRT Has No Power To Condone Delay In Filing Review Application Under RDB Act : SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Supreme Court has held that the Debts Recovery Tribunal has no power to condone the delay in filing application for review under the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993The Court held that the provisions of Limitation Act, including the provision to condone delay under Section 5 of it, apply only to original applications filed under Section 19 of …

Condonation of Delay In Filing Petitions Under Special/Local Law – Issue Should Be Heard By A Larger Bench
5 years, 4 months ago

Condonation of Delay In Filing Petitions Under Special/Local Law – Issue Should Be Heard By A Larger Bench

Live Law  

IntroductionTime limitation of filing a suit/appeal/application stands prescribed under provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963. The Supreme Court held that the Appellate Authority acts as a Court and not a persona designatum, it can condone the delay under Section 5 of Limitation Act as the two requirements for the applicability of Section 29 are satisfied, namely, different periods of limitation …

DRT Has No Power To Condone Delay In Filing Appeal: SC [Read Judgment]
7 years, 5 months ago

DRT Has No Power To Condone Delay In Filing Appeal: SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Supreme Court, in International Asset Reconstruction Company Of India Ltd vs The Official Liquidator Of Aldrich Pharmaceuticals Ltd And Others, has held that the prescribed period of 30 days under Section 30 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, for preferring an appeal against the order of the recovery officer cannot be condoned by application of Section …

DRT Has No Power To Condone Delay In Filing Appeal: SC [Read Judgment]
7 years, 5 months ago

DRT Has No Power To Condone Delay In Filing Appeal: SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Supreme Court, in International Asset Reconstruction Company Of India Ltd vs The Official Liquidator Of Aldrich Pharmaceuticals Ltd And Others, has held that the prescribed period of 30 days under Section 30 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, for preferring an appeal against the order of the recovery officer cannot be condoned by application of Section …

District Consumer Forums can grant a further period of 15 days to the opposite party for filing his version and not beyond that: Supreme Court
9 years, 3 months ago

District Consumer Forums can grant a further period of 15 days to the opposite party for filing his version and not beyond that: Supreme Court

Live Law  

We reiterate the view that the District Forum can grant a further period of 15 days to the opposite party for filing his version or reply and not beyond that, the three Judge Bench of the Apex court said holding that the law laid down in Dr. J.J. Merchant case prevails over latter view taken in Kailash case.Three Judges Bench …

District Consumer Forums can grant a further period of 15 days to the opposite party for filing his version and not beyond that: Supreme Court
9 years, 3 months ago

District Consumer Forums can grant a further period of 15 days to the opposite party for filing his version and not beyond that: Supreme Court

Live Law  

We reiterate the view that the District Forum can grant a further period of 15 days to the opposite party for filing his version or reply and not beyond that, the three Judge Bench of the Apex court said holding that the law laid down in Dr. J.J. Merchant case prevails over latter view taken in Kailash case.Three Judges Bench …

Discover Related