Appeal filed along with application for condonation of delay when dismissed is a decree within Section 2(2) CPC
Orissa High Court: A Single Judge Bench of Dr A.K. Rath, J., dismissed a writ petition challenging the order passed by the
Condonation of delay
Discretionary order for condonation of delay passed by quasi-judicial powers cannot be interfered with in writ jurisdiction
Jammu and Kashmir High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Sanjeev Kumar, J., dismissed the current writ petition invoked for quashing
Increasing tendency of treating delay in filing as a non-serious matter: Need for a vigilant and cautious approach by the Courts
Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Single Judge Bench of Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J., dismissed a revision petition filed against the order of
Time consumed in party bona fidely litigating cause before wrong forum is to be considered for condonation of delay
Bombay High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of A.M. Dhavale, J. allowed an appeal filed against the order of District Judge
Application seeking condonation of delay must meet the test of Section 5 of the Jammu & Kashmir Limitation Samvat, 1995 and satisfy the court with sufficient cause for delay
Jammu & Kashmir High Court: A Single Judge bench comprising of M.K. Hanjura, J. while dealing with an application for condonation of
Principles while considering petition for condonation of delay reiterated, lack of bona fides is ground for dismissal
Sikkim High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Meenakshi Madan Rai, Acting CJ. dismissed a petition filed for condonation of 50
Condonation of delay rejected due to ‘lackadaisical approach’ of the applicant
Sikkim High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Meenakshi Madan Rai, Acting CJ. dismissed an application for condonation of 115 days’
Period of delay is not the criteria while considering application under Section 5 of Limitation Act
Delhi High Court: A Division Bench comprising of G.S. Sistani and Sangita Dhingra Sehgal, JJ., refused to condone a delay of 65
Power under S. 5 of Limitation Act is not to be exercised in a mechanical manner
Himachal Pradesh High Court: A civil petition was decided by a Single Judge Bench comprising of Ajay Mohan Goel, J., wherein the
Application seeking condonation of delay and main proceeding cannot be clubbed together along with adduced evidence under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC
High Court of Jammu and Kashmir: The Bench of Alok Aradhe J. recently addressed a revision petition wherein the petitioner challenged the
30 days limitation period under Section 30 of RDB Act can’t be condoned by Section 5 of Limitation Act
Supreme Court: Deciding the question as to whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 can be invoked to condone the prescribed
If the delay is not condonable statutorily, it cannot be condoned taking recourse to Article 142 of the Constitution
Supreme Court: In an appeal preferred under Section 125 of the Electricity Act, 2003, the 3-Judge Bench of Dipak Misra, A.M. Khanwilkar
Appellate Authorities cannot condone delay beyond the limits specified in the statute
Madras High Court: This division bench of S. Manikumar and D. Krishnakumar, JJ held that there can be no order for condonation
Sufficient Cause u/s. 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 is a pure individualistic test
Punjab and Haryana High Court: While examining the legal position regarding the condonation of delay u/s. 5 of Limitation Act, 1963,