Appeal delay condoned due to lost documents, order set aside for review.

The appeal was filed with a delay of 22 days due to the misplacement of documents by the CHA and factory clerk. The judge, considering the explanation provided by the appellant and a Supreme Court decision, decided to condone the delay. As a result, the impugned order dismissing the appeal on the grounds of limitation was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a decision on the merits in accordance with the law. The Special Leave Petition (SLP) was also disposed of in the same judgment.

---

---

Issues: Delay in filing appeal, condonation of delay, dismissal of appeal on ground of limitation

In this case, the main issue revolves around the delay in filing the appeal and whether the delay should be condoned. The appellant argued that the delay was due to the misplacement of documents by the CHA and factory clerk, leading to the late preparation and filing of the appeal. The appellant cited a Supreme Court decision to support their request for condonation of delay. On the other hand, the respondent supported the impugned order which dismissed the appeal on the grounds of limitation.

Upon review, the judge found that the delay of 22 days in filing the appeal was adequately explained by the appellant. The judge noted that the papers were misplaced by the CHA and factory clerk, leading to the engagement of multiple counsels before the appeal could be prepared and filed. Citing the Supreme Court decision referenced by the appellant, the judge emphasized that a lenient view should be taken when considering condonation of delay to advance the cause of justice. Consequently, the judge decided to condone the delay, set aside the impugned order, and remand the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a decision on the merits in accordance with the law. The Special Leave Petition (SP) was also disposed of in the same judgment.

---